Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/2179/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2179 of 2008
With
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2180 of 2008
To
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2183 of 2008
=========================================================
PRAKASH
SHANKARRAV KHADE & 4 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 7 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MS
SHALINI S MAIR for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 5.
Mr. S.P. Hasurkar, AGP, for Respondent(s) :
1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
8.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD
Date
: 27/03/2008
ORAL
ORDER
The
learned counsel for the petitioners wants to withdraw these
petitions. Permitted to be withdrawn.
(BHAGWATI PRASAD, J)
(pkn)
-2-
The
learned counsel for the petitioners after signature on the order,
appeared and submitted that she withdrew the petition without
instructions from her clients. This was a decision taken by her on
her own wisdom but her clients are not agreeable and therefore she
prays that the order may be recalled and an order on merits may be
passed. Looking to the difficult situation in which the learned
advocate has landed herself, the order passed earlier deserves to be
recalled. Accordingly the order is recalled.
Heard
learned counsel for the parties. The allegations in the writ
petition are levelled for unfairness of the selection process. These
allegations come after the petitioners have already participated in
the process of selection. The allegations are of the nature which are
not based on the personal knowledge of the petitioners. There is no
averment of the petitioners about the source of information. They are
of general character and vague. The process of selection cannot be
impugned unless definite allegations are made and the allegations are
substantiated by solid evidence. In the instant case, the allegations
are bald, vague and unsupported by any material evidence. In that
view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that there is no
substance in the petition. Hence no interference is called for. The
petition is dismissed.
Date:
27.3.2008 (BHAGWATI PRASAD, J)
(pkn)
Top