Gujarat High Court High Court

D vs State on 8 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
D vs State on 8 March, 2010
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/501/1987	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 501 of 1987
 

 
 
=========================================================


 

D
P CHAUDHARY & 9 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
NOTICE
UNSERVED for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 4,7 - 10.MR RR VAKIL for Petitioner(s) : 5 -
6. 
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1 -
4. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 08/03/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

By
way of this petition the petitioner has prayed for directions
directing the respondents to release an amount of increments and
direct them not to withhold any of the increments of the petitioner
thereafter for the reasons of not passing language examinations and
further direction to pay arrears.

The
issue raised in this petition is squarely covered by the decision of
this Court ( Coram: R.S.Garg, M.R.Shah,J.J.) passed in Special Civil
Application No. 502 of 1987. The said order reads as under :

Mr.

M.G. Nagarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner no.7. None for the
other petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 502 of 1987 and
none for the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 5202 of
1986.

From
the records, it appears that except the petitioner no.7 in Special
Civil Application No. 502 of 1987, none is represented by anybody
though some of them are already served under the directions of the
Court. Under the circumstances, we dismiss the petition with liberty
in favour of the petitioners that if they are still aggrieved by the
action taken by the respondents and the provisions contained in the
law, then, they would be entitled to make an application for
restoration of these petitions. Rule is discharged in each of the
petition with no order as to costs. Interim relief, if any, stands
vacated.

Mr.

Nagarkar, learned counsel for the petitioner no.7 in Special Civil
Application No. 502 of 1987 submits that the departmental head has
made recommendations to the State Government in relation to the
petitioner no.7 that his case be considered as a special case.

Taking
into consideration the totality of the circumstances and the fact
brought to our notice, we hereby direct the State Government to
consider the said recommendations submitted by the departmental head,
within a period of four months from today and pass a speaking order
on the same, if not yet decided. If the recommendations are accepted
by the State Government then that may be the end of the matter, but
if the petitioner no. 7 is still aggrieved by the final orders passed
by the State Government, then, he would be free to challenge the
same in appropriate proceedings before the appropriate forum.

In that view of the
matter, the authority is directed to consider the case of the
petitioner as per the directions contained in the aforesaid order
within a period of four months from today. With above observations,
petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to
the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.

[K.S.Jhaveri,J.]

*Himansu/-

   

Top