Gujarat High Court
Union Of India vs Hiteshkumar S/O Hasmukhrai Mehta on 2 April, 2025
Author: Umesh A. Trivedi
Bench: Umesh A. Trivedi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1516 of 2020
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2022
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1516 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
=================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
=================================================
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Versus
HITESHKUMAR S/O HASMUKHRAI MEHTA
=================================================
Appearance:
MR HARSHEEL D SHUKLA(6158) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,2,3,4
MR MS TRIVEDI(939) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
=================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHEEKATI
MANAVENDRANATH ROY
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025
undefined
Date : 02/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE UMESH A. TRIVEDI)
1. This petition is field by the petitioners challenging interim order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad (herein after referred to as "the Tribunal") in Misc. Application No. 120/72/2018 in Original Application No. 120/359/2017, whereby, during the pendency of the Misc. application and before the returnable date in it comes, ex parte interim order, as prayed for by the original applicant therein, came to be granted staying the departmental inquiry until criminal case is complete.
2. Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. M. S. Trivedi, learned advocate for the respondent waives service of notice of Rule. Considering the controversy involved in the matter, with the consent of learned advocates appearing for both the sides, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.
Page 2 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined
3. Heard, Mr. Harsheel D. Shukla, learned Central Government Standing Counsel for the petitioners. According to his submission, though in Misc. Application in question, notice came to be issued by "the Tribunal" on 24.01.2018, making it returnable on 06.03.2018, "the Tribunal", despite being conscious of it, on an interim prayer being made, an ex parte interim order passed on 22.02.2018, which was never granted in original application or while issuing notice in Misc. Application, that too, at an interim stage, without hearing the petitioners.
3.1 He has further submitted that conducting departmental inquiry simultaneously along with the criminal prosecution, may be based on same facts, would be permissible and ignoring the same, interim order is passed staying the departmental proceedings till the conclusion of criminal case, that too, by way of an interim order, as aforesaid, by way of interim prayer in Misc. Application, before returnable date comes. Therefore, he submitted that the impugned order is required to be interfered with.
Page 3 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined
4. As against that, Mr. M. S. Trivedi, learned advocate for the respondent vehemently submitted that this petition is filed against an interim order, which is not maintainable. He has further submitted that though Misc. Application is still pending, the petitioners have neither made any application for vacating the interim relief or modifying the same. Therefore, he submitted that this petition may not be entertained.
4.1 He has further submitted that since criminal case has reached at fag end and the Investigating Officer in the criminal case is going to be cross-examined on 09.04.2025, this relief may be continued further, till the conclusion of the criminal trial against the respondent and therefore, he submitted that this petition is required to be rejected or deferred till Original Application is finally decided, which is also ripe for hearing.
5. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties appearing and going through the impugned order as also the documents annexed with the petition, we are surprised to know that Page 4 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined despite only notice, consciously issued in the Misc. Application, making it returnable on 06.03.2018, an interim relief prayed for, that too, before the returnable date and it came to be granted ex parte. Though, "the Tribunal" is conscious while recording the order impugned to the extent that present petitioners are unaware of listing of Misc. Application on that day i.e. 22.02.2018, still it went on granting ex parte interim order, which was not granted while issuing notice in the Misc. Application. Not only that, once no interim relief was granted while issuing notice, at least "the Tribunal" should have restrained itself form entertaining any such prayer for grant of interim relief, till the returnable date. Though, that Misc. Application is kept pending directing it to be listed on the returnable date, it is only kept for the purpose to show that it is still pending, otherwise, interim relief is already granted without hearing. 5.1 The contention that the petitioners have not applied either for vacating or modifying the interim relief granted by "the Tribunal"
before it, this petition should not be entertained, is required to be rejected for the reason that there was no need to entertain such a Page 5 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined prayer when notice came to be issued without grant of any ad- interim relief, till the returnable date i.e. 06.03.2018. There was no occasion or necessity for passing such an order, that too, interim in nature, without hearing the petitioners when notice already came to be issued.
5.2 Though, this petition is filed against an interim order, in the peculiar facts, as aforesaid, we would entertain the present petition even against an interim order when "the Tribunal" has entertained the prayer for interim relief despite notice issued and without waiting for the returnable date to come and taking up the matter on 22.02.2018 and granted the interim relief in the nature of final relief, and instead of disposing of the said Misc. Application, kept it pending to make a show that it is still pending.
6. In that view of the matter, this petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 22.02.2018 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in Misc. Application No. 120/72/2018 in Original Application No. Page 6 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/1516/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 02/04/2025 undefined 120/359/2017 is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute, accordingly.
6.1 Connected civil application stands disposed of.
[ Umesh A. Trivedi, J. ] [ Cheekati Manavendranath Roy, J. ] hiren/5tss2425 Page 7 of 7 Uploaded by HIREN MER(HC00351) on Fri Apr 04 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Apr 07 21:35:40 IST 2025