State Of Gujarat vs Jivubhai Chehubhai Makwana

       C/LPA/187/2023                                   ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

              R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.              187 of 2023

       In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10759 of 2020
                              With
         CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2022
           In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 187 of 2023
==========================================================
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
                                   Versus
                         JIVUBHAI CHEHUBHAI MAKWANA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, AGP for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR MA PAREKH(1088) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA
           and
           HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA

                               Date : 22/02/2023

                        ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA) Heared learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Krutik Parikh for the appellant State and learned advocate Mr.M.A. Parekh for the respondent-original petitioner.

2. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 02.07.2021 of the learned Single Judge whereby the learned Single Judge allowed the Special Civil Application of the petitioner-respondent herein.

2.1 It was directed that the period of service rendered by the petitioner at Ashram Shala was Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 24 20:46:13 IST 2023 C/LPA/187/2023 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 required to be counted as continuous. The petitioner was held entitled to consequential benefits as well as to be treated continuous in service. It was observed and directed that considering the age of the petitioner of 57 years, the respondent authorities may undertake the exercise to comply with the directions expeditiously.

3. When the appeal came up for consideration, it was the admitted position obtained that against the aforesaid judgment and order of learned Single Judge, sought to be challenged in this appeal, Misc. Civil Application No. 683 of 2022 was filed for contempt. In the said proceedings, order dated 06.09.2022 came to be passed by the Division Bench, which reads as under, "Mr. K.M. Antani, learned AGP has placed on record the order dated 6.9.2022 under which it has been resolved to implement the order of the learned Single Judge passed in Special Civil Application No.10759 of 2020 dated 29.6.2021 whereby the respondents are required to treat the period of service rendered by the petitioner in Ashram Shala as continuous service from the date of his appointment. It is also stated by the learned AGP that consequential benefits flowing from the order dated 6.9.2022 would be remitted to the account of the petitioner within three working days from today. Hence, placing his submission and undertaking on record and reserving liberty to the applicant to revive the contempt petition in the event of the amount not being credited as undertaken by the learned AGP appearing for the State, contempt proceeding stands closed."

C/LPA/187/2023 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 3.1 It could be seen from the above order that the Division Bench noted that learned Assistant Government Pleader had placed on record the order which showed the compliance of the order. The respondents had proceeded to implement the directions of the learned Single Judge. It was observed by the Court event that the applicant shall have liberty to revive the contempt petition in the event the amount not credited as undertaken on behalf of the respondent.

4. There is no denial that the amount has been paid thereafter to the applicant. It further appears that the aforesaid contempt proceedings were subsequently revived.

4.1 Insofar as the revision of pension was concerned, the Court noted in paragraph 2 of the said order dated 15.12.2022 that the arrears of higher pay-scale payable to the applicant were paid. And it was stated before the Court that the revision of pension was undertaken and would be iad next day.

"2. When the matters are taken up at 4:50 p.m., learned AGP Mr. K.M. Antani submits that insofar as arrears of higher pay-scale payable to complainants are concerned, same has been paid and insofar as revision of pension is concerned, same would be undertaken and would be paid by tomorrow. His submission and undertaking is placed on record."

4.2 In the said order, the contempt bench finally Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 24 20:46:13 IST 2023 C/LPA/187/2023 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 recorded that in view of the submissions made by learned Assistant Government Pleader, the question of framing charge for contempt was not required to be addressed.

"4. In view of submission made by learned AGP, question of framing of charge as ordered or continuing with the contempt proceedings, since has since been re-opened, would not arise and accordingly, it stands CLOSED with liberty to complainants to revive only in the event of revision of pension not being undertaken and paid."

4.3 In view of the above developments after filing of the Letters Patent Appeal, as the judgment and order of learned Single Judge is implemented, the examination of merits in this Letters Patent Appeal is rendered to be an academic exercise. It is trite that the court would not undertake adjudicatory exercise where issue stands out academic.

5. In above view, the Letters Patent Appeal is not entertained and accordingly stands dismissed.

Civil Application would not survive in view of the disposal of the main appeal itself.

(N.V.ANJARIA, J) (NIRAL R. MEHTA,J) BIJOY B. PILLAI Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Fri Feb 24 20:46:13 IST 2023