Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/15873/2010 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15873 of 2010
=========================================================
DILIPSINH
DEVSINH ZALA & 2 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
ASHISH M DAGLI for
Petitioners.
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 16/12/2010
ORAL
ORDER
This
petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been
filed with the following prayers:-
(A) This
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to admit this Special Civil
Application.
(B) This
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to allow this Special Civil Application
by directing the respondents to decide pending application,
representation of the petitioners at Annexure-E and be pleased to
grant benefit as made in favour of the employees of Rapar Area
Development Authority.
(C) This
Hon’ble Court may be pleased to allow this petition by directing
respondents to grant similar benefit as ordered by this Hon’ble
Court in Special Civil Application No. 9654 of 2009 (Coram:
D.H.Waghela,J.) dated 21.12.2009.
(D) Pending
admission hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to direct the respondents to permit the
petitioners to earn their livelihood from service they are rendering
to Bhachau Area Development Authority and be pleased to direct them
not to restrain the petitioners from doing their services.
(E) Pending
admission hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble
Court may be pleased to direct the respondents not to disturb the
petitioners in any manner in discharging their duty as Maintenance
Surveyor and Peon, till pendency of the petition in the interest of
justice.
(F) Grant
such other and further relief(s) as deemed just and proper by this
Hon’ble Court in the interest of justice.
2. At
the very outset, Mr.Nirav Sanghvi, learned advocate, appearing for
Mr.Ashish M.Dagli, learned advocate for the petitioners, submits that
the interest of justice would be met, if respondent No.1 is directed
to consider and decide the representation dated 16.2.2008 made by the
petitioners, or in the alternative, to permit the petitioners to make
a fresh representation, which may be decided by the said respondent
expeditiously.
3. Upon
the above statement being made by the learned advocate for the
petitioners, the following order is passed:
3.1 The
petitioners are permitted to make a fresh representation
to respondent No.1, within a period of two weeks from today. If such
a representation is preferred by the petitioners within two weeks
from today, respondent No.1 shall decide the same as expeditiously
as possible and preferably within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of this order.
4. It
is clarified that while passing this order, the Court has not entered
into the merits of the case.
5. The
petition is disposed of, in the above terms. Direct Service is
permitted.
[Smt.Abhilasha
Kumari,J.]
(patel)
Top