Gujarat High Court High Court

Dave vs D on 11 May, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Dave vs D on 11 May, 2010
Author: A.L.Dave,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Bankim.N.Mehta,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

MCA/330/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR CONTEMPT No. 330 of 2010
 

In


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 8149 of 2009
 

In
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 343 of 2006
 

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

 

DAVE
VIPUL HARSHADRAI & 16 - Applicant(s)
 

Versus
 

D
H BRAHMBHATT (I.A.S.), COMMISSIONER OF RAJKOT MUNICIPAL - Opponent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MUKESH H RATHOD for
Applicant(s) : 1 - 17. 
MR KB TRIVEDI ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR RM
CHHAYA for Opponent(s) :
1, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE BANKIM.N.MEHTA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/05/2010  
 
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)

Learned
advocate Mr Rathod for the applicant, on instructions from his client
who is present in the Court, states that the applicants’ grievance is
non-grant of benefit and that the applicants are ready and willing to
restrict their claim of the benefits with effect from 1.10.2001
instead of 17.6.1998.

2. Upon
this statement being made by Mr Rathod, learned advocate Mr Hiral K
Shah for respondent Nos. 2 to 13 states that the said respondents as
members of the Standing Committee will take up the issue in the
ensuing meeting of the Standing Committee to be held on 14th
May 2010 and take the decision on the same extending the benefit to
the applicants w.e.f. 1.10.2001 as per the decision of this Court in
the order dated 30.9.2009 in Civil Application No.8149 of 2009.

3. Learned
Advocate General Mr Kamal B Trivedi who appears for the Commissioner
with Mr RM Chhaya is heard.

4. In
light of this development, no further action is required to be taken
at this stage. We reserve liberty for the applicants to revive this
application in the event the decision is not taken as per the
statement made by learned advocate Mr Shah and is not implemented
within a reasonable time, say, four weeks.

5. The
application accordingly stands disposed of. Notice is discharged. No
costs.

(A.L.

DAVE, J.)

(BANKIM
N. MEHTA, J.)

zgs/-

   

Top