Gujarat High Court
Amreli District Panchayat vs Kantibhai Okhabhai Rathod on 31 January, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/316/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 316 of
2025
In F/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 259 of 2025
==========================================================
AMRELI DISTRICT PANCHAYAT
Versus
KANTIBHAI OKHABHAI RATHOD & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
KAASH K THAKKAR(7332) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SAHIL TRIVEDI, LD.ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 11,12,13
MR BHUVNESH GEHLOT, LD.ADVOCATE FOR MR NK MAJMUDAR(430)
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
Date : 31/01/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
1. At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Kaash Thakkar for the applicant submitted that on similar issue, this Court has already disposed of Letters Patent Appeal. He has placed reliance on the very same order.
2. The present application is filed for condonation of delay of 89 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal. Explanation given are as under:
Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Sat Feb 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 22:02:18 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/316/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined
3. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the original petition was filed against the State of Gujarat but Respondent No.10- Chandrakant Nanalal Joshi was an employee of Amreli District Panchayat, yet the Amreli District Panchayat was not joined as a party and she could not make any effective representation. Therefore, the order is passed ex parte against the present appellant without providing an opportunity of being heard to the appellant.
4. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that the Hon'ble Single Judge had delivered the judgment on 19.02.2024. The information of the above order passed on 19.02.2024 was given the Panchayat on last week of February, 2024.
5. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that thereafter the applicant had sought legal opinion in March, 2024 from the advocate panel for filing of SLP. In and around April, applicant received the opinion from the panel advocate to opining to seek guidance of Panchayat Department in preferring the SLP in the Supreme Court in this matter.
6. Learned advocate for the applicant submitted that thereafter on May, 2024, the Ld. District Development Officer sought the guidance of the Panchayat Department and Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Sat Feb 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 22:02:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/316/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined thereafter after some days, the Panchayat Department permitted the Ld. District Development Officer to proceed further in filing an SLP.
7. Before the applicants could approached the Hon'ble Apex Court, the Hon'ble Apex Court passed an order dated on 06.09.2024 in Misc. Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722 of 2021, wherein the Supreme Court has clarified the aspect of granting one increment/ last increment to the employees, who have either retired on 30.06.2006 or on 1st July, 2006.
8. Thereafter, the applicant sought the opinion of present advocate who advised them to file a review petition in November, 2024. Therefore, the present applicant decided to file a review petition before this Hon'ble Court. He submitted that the delay caused in preferring the review petition is bonafide and the same may be condoned.
9. It is also not in dispute that there are several Letters Patent Appeals and the writ petitions filed by numerous employees from all over the State of Gujarat and they are disposed of in terms of the judgement passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 06.09.2024 passed in Misc. Application Diary No.2400 of 2024 in Special Leave Petition (C) No.4722 of Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Sat Feb 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 22:02:18 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/CA/316/2025 ORDER DATED: 31/01/2025 undefined 2021 in the case of Union of India and another V/s. M.Siddaaj. Thus, in view of subsequent development in light of the aforesaid explanation, delay of 89 days is condoned.
10. Registry is directed to give regular number to the Misc. Civil Application seeking review.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) (MAUNA M. BHATT,J) DIPTI PATEL/4 Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Sat Feb 01 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 03 22:02:18 IST 2025