Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/922/2011 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 922 of
2011
=========================================================
MENA
KALUBHAI BARAIYA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
VIJ CO LTD & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
JK PARMAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 03/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been
filed with the following prayers:-
“[A] Your
Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus or a writ in
nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ/s, order/s, and/or
directions/s directing the respondents to reconsider the merit of the
petitioner and give appointment to the petitioner on the post of
Vidhyut Sahayak(Junior Assistant) within a period of three weeks or
within the stipulated time as may be fixed by this Honourable Court.
[B] Pending
admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your
Lordships may be pleased to grant ad-interim/interim relief directing
the respondents to reconsider the merit of the petitioner for the
appointment of the petitioner on the post of Vidhyut Sahayak(Junior
Assistant).
[C] Such
other and further relief/s as may be deem just and proper in the
facts and circumstances of the case may please be granted in favour
of the petitioner in the interest of justice.”
2. At
the very outset, Mr. J.K. Parmar, learned advocate for the
petitioner states that the interest of justice would be met, if the
petitioner is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.2,
in order to ventilate her grievances.
3. In
view of the above statement being made by the learned advocate for
the petitioner, the following order is passed:-
(a) The
petitioner is permitted to make a representation to respondent No.2,
within a period of two weeks from today.
(b) If
such a representation is made within the stipulated period of time,
respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the same, in accordance
with law, as expeditiously as possible.
It
is clarified that while passing the order, the Court has not entered
into the merits of the case.
4. The
petition is disposed of, in the above terms.
Direct
Service is permitted.
(Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.)
Safir*
Top