Gujarat High Court
District Development Officer vs Vijaybhai Ashrambhai Rathwa on 23 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia, Gita Gopi
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/194/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 194 of 2025
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8328 of 2024
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 194 of 2025
==========================================================
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
Versus
VIJAYBHAI ASHRAMBHAI RATHWA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. NISARG N JAIN(8807) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS NIRALI SARDA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5
MS PRACHI UPADHYAYA for MR VAIBHAV A VYAS(2896) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1,2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE GITA GOPI
Date : 23/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. Learned advocate Mr. Nisarg N.Jain appearing for the appellant at the outset, has submitted that so far as the captioned writ petition is concerned, which has been decided by the learned Single Judge with group of petitions, the facts differ and the ratio of the other judgments on which the reliance is placed by the learned Single Judge including the Division Bench judgment dated 10.03.2024 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.102 of 2024 will not apply since the respondents are not their employees. He has submitted that these vital facts were not brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition within a shorter period of one month.
Page 1 of 2 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Apr 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 25 00:59:00 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/LPA/194/2025 ORDER DATED: 23/04/2025 undefined
2. Learned advocate Mr. Jain has submitted that no appearance was entered by the present appellant hence, it is urged that liberty may be given to the present appellant to file review application pointing out all the facts before the learned Single Judge.
3. Per contra, learned advocate Ms. Prachi Upadhyaya for learned advocate Mr. Vaibhav A.Vyas appearing for the respondents-employees has submitted that no such submissions were advanced before the learned Single Judge and despite the opportunity given to the appellant, he did not choose to appear.
4. Be that as it may, it will be open for the present appellant to file appropriate application seeking review of the order dated 25.07.2024 passed in the captioned petition.
5. With these observations, the present Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of.
6. As a sequel, connected Civil Application also stands disposed of.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) (GITA GOPI,J) Pankaj/30 Page 2 of 2 Uploaded by MR PANKAJ KUMAR PRASAD(HC00967) on Thu Apr 24 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Apr 25 00:59:00 IST 2025