Gujarat High Court High Court

District vs Sobhnaben on 7 October, 2011

Gujarat High Court
District vs Sobhnaben on 7 October, 2011
Author: V. M. Jhaveri,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

CA/6187/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR STAY No. 6187 of 2011
 

In


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 886 of 2011
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16324 of 2010
 

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

DISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & 1 - Applicants
 

Versus
 

SOBHNABEN
R DABHI & 4 - Respondents
 

====================================== 
Appearance
: 
MR
ARPIT A KAPADIA for Applicants. 
RULE SERVED for Respondent
No.1. 
MR NJ SHAH, AGP for Respondent Nos.2 to 4. 
MS HARSHAL N
PANDYA for Respondent No. 5.  
======================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 07/10/2011 
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)

Though
rule is served on respondent No.1 – original petitioner, none
appears on her behalf.

2. Learned
counsel Mr. Arpit A. Kapadia has submitted that in view of the
decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of
Karnataka and others v. Ameerbi and others
, (2007) 11 SCC 681,
the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1 – original
petitioner is not maintainable. He further submitted that as per the
above judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held that persons working
as anganwadi workers do not hold civil post. The posts of anganwadi
workers are not statutory posts and they are created under a scheme.
Hence, he submitted that as the respondent No.1 was not holding a
civil post, the writ petition filed by her under Article 226 is not
maintainable.

3. The
Court finds force in the submission made by learned counsel Mr.
Kapadia. Hence, the ad-interim relief granted by this Court vide
order dated 15.06.2011 stands confirmed till the final disposal of
Letters Patent Appeal.

4. In
the result, this Civil Application stands allowed. Rule is made
absolute to the above extent. No order as to costs.

Sd/-

[V. M. SAHAI, J.]

Sd/-

[K. S. JHAVERI, J.]

Savariya

   

Top