Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/5970/2010 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR AMENDMENT No. 5970 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3541 of 2010
=====================================================
PATAN
MUNICIPALITY THROUGH CHIEF OFFICER - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 3 - Respondent(s)
=====================================================
Appearance :
MR
NV ANJARIA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
Mr.Amit P.Patel,learned
ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3.
MR BHARAT JANI
for Respondent(s) :
4,
=====================================================
CORAM
:
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 18/06/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. This
application has been filed with a prayer to permit amendment of
Special Civil Application No.3541 of 2010,as detailed in paragraph
Nos.3 to 3.2 of the Application.
2. I
have heard Mr.N.V.Anjaria,learned advocate for the applicant
(original petitioner) and Mr.Bharat Jani,learned advocate for
respondent No.4 in the Application. It is submitted by
Mr.Anjari,learned advocate that the petition is directed against
order dated 15-2-2010 passed by the Deputy Secretary (Appeals) in
Revision Application No.26 of 2009. By way of the said order, the
Revision Application of respondent No.4 has been allowed.
3. In
the petition, Rule and Notice as to interim relief were issued on
23-3-2010 and ad-interim relief in terms of paragraph 10(B) was
granted, by this Court. It is submitted by Mr.Anjaria that
thereafter, by communication dated 19-4-2010 of the Deputy Secretary
(Appeals), Department of Urban Housing and Urban Development
(respondent No.2), who had passed the impugned order, the petitioner
is informed that the order dated 15-2-2010 is not the correct order
as the same has been found to be tampered with in his Office.
Respondent No.2, by way of the said communication has forwarded the
true copy of the order passed in Revision Application No. 26 of
2009, which is in favour of the petitioner. The learned counsel for
the applicant has further submitted that in view of this
development,as stated in the communication dated 19-4-2010 of
respondent No.2, the petitioner has no other option but to withdraw
the petition for which a separate application is moved. However, the
peculiar facts of the case ought to be permitted to be brought on
record, thereby necessitating the present amendment.
4. Mr.Bharat
Jani,learned advocate for respondent No.4 has objection to the grant
of the amendment.
5. Having
heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and in view of
the peculiar facts that have emerged in the matter,the interest of
justice would be met if the present application for amendment, is
granted.
6. Accordingly,
the application is allowed. The applicant is permitted to carry out
the amendment in Special Civil Application No.3541 of 2010,as
detailed in paragraph Nos.3 to 3.2. The application stands disposed
of.
(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J)
arg
Top