Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/17979/2007 1/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17979 of 2007
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=============================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=============================================================
MOMIN
YAKUBBHAI VALIBHAI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
NK MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3.
MR
HARDIK C RAWAL for Respondent(s) : 1,
MR RA RINDANI,
LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 16/02/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1.0 By way of the present petition, the
petitioner
has inter alia prayed for directing the the Gujarat State Road
Transport Corporation Authorities to decide the representation
made by the present petitioner
and directing the concerned respondent-authorities
to make payment of the amount of Rs.10 lakhs towards compensation in
the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case.
2.0 The facts of the case, if put in a
nutshell, are as under :
2.1 The petitioner
is serving in a private hotel as a cashier. On 21st
October 2002, the eldest son of the petitioner
namely Sajid was travelling in an S.T. Bus bearing registration
No.GJ-18-V-4762, which was being plied between Ambaji and Patan. At
about 07-00 O’clock a mob of an unknown persons had attacked the said
S.T. Bus. The said incident took place at a distance of about half
kilometre from village Manwada. In the said incident, Sajid-son of
the petitioner
was dragged from the said S.T. Bus and he was beaten up mercilessly
by the said unknown persons in the mob and he succumbed to death.
Hence, by way of present petition, the petitioner
has prayed for compensation of Rs.10 lakhs from the
respondent-Corporation.
3.0 During the course of hearing,
Mr.R.A. Rindani, learned
Assistant Government Pleader, has drawn the attention of the
Court to the order dated 26th October 2004 (Annexure-D)
passed by this Court in Special
Civil Application No.14127 of 2004 preferred by the very
petitioner
praying for the similar type of reliefs. It
would be beneficial to reproduce the said order as under :
Mr.N.K. Majmudar, learned counsel
for the petitioner
seeks permission to withdraw this petition to file appropriate
proceedings before appropriate forum. Permission granted. Petition
stands disposed of as withdrawn.
4.0 Thus, in view of aforesaid, when
the petitioner
had already approached this Court praying for the similar type of
reliefs as prayed for in this petition and the said petition has been
withdrawn by the petitioner,
the petitioner
is estopped from filing such a petition before this Court. The
present petition
is barred by the principle of res-judicate. Further, it is pertinent
to note that though the petitioner
had made a representation
to the respondent-State
and though the respondent-State
has been joined as a party respondent,
the petitioner
has not produced any policy of the respondent-State
on record. Further, after the said order dated 26th
October 2004, though the petitioner
was to prefer appropriate proceedings before appropriate forum, he
has chosen to make representation
before the respondent-State
instead of availing the remedy available to him. Therefore also, no
interference is called for at the hands of this Court and the
petition is required to be dismissed.
5.0 For the foregoing reasons, the
present petition fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. Rule is
discharged with no order as to costs. Interim relief, if any, stands
hereby vacated.
6.0 It is, however, made clear that it
is open to the petitioner
to approach the Consumer Forum or the competent Civil Court or the
concerned Tribunal for ventilating his grievances.
(K.S.
Jhaveri, J)
Aakar
Top