Gujarat High Court High Court

Rajendrasinh vs Gujarat on 29 March, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Rajendrasinh vs Gujarat on 29 March, 2011
Author: Abhilasha Kumari,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/16822/2010	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16822 of 2010
 

With


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16796 of 2010
 

With


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 16836 of 2010
 

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

RAJENDRASINH
KESHARSINH PARMAR - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

GUJARAT
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, THROUGH CHAIRMAN & 1 -
Respondent(s)
 

=====================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
MUKESH H RATHOD for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
Mr.Shalin N.Mehta for MR
HEMANG M SHAH for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2. 
=====================================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HON'BLE
			SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 29/03/2011 

 

 
ORAL
ORDER

1. By
filing these petitions, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of
an appropriate writ or direction, directing the respondent-Gujarat
State Road Transport Corporation to decide the applications filed by
the petitioners for grant of appointment on compassionate grounds, as
per the prevailing policy. All the petitioners have made applications
to the respondent-Corporation for giving them appointments on the
post of Clerk.

2. In
the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondents, it is stated that
there are no vacant posts of Clerks in the respondent-Corporation.

3. Today,
when the matters are taken up for hearing Mr.Mukesh H.Rathod, learned
advocate for the petitioners states, upon instructions, that the
petitions may be disposed of with a direction to the
respondent-Corporation to consider the case of the petitioners, as
and when the posts of Clerks are available.

4. Mr.Shalin
N.Mehta, learned advocate for Mr. Hemang M.Shah, learned advocate for
the respondents has submitted that the respondents will consider the
case of the petitioners for grant of appointments on compassionate
grounds, as and when the posts of Clerks are available, in accordance
with law.

5. Having
heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and in view of
the above statements made by them, the following order is passed:

The
respondent-Corporation may consider the case of the petitioners for
grant of compassionate appointment on the posts of Clerks, as and
when the said posts are advertised, in accordance with law.

6. The
petitions are disposed of, in the above terms, with liberty to the
petitioners to approach this Court, in case of difficulty.

7. It
is clarified that while passing this order, the Court has not entered
into the merits of the case.

(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J)

arg

   

Top