Maheshbhai Somabhai Vasava vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 4174 Guj

         C/SCA/2638/2021                                   ORDER




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2638 of 2021

=========================================================
                MAHESHBHAI SOMABHAI VASAVA
                            Versus
                      STATE OF GUJARAT
=========================================================
Appearance:
MR RASHESH A RINDANI(5380) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MR SHIRISH H GOHIL(3253) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3
MR KRUTIK PARIKH ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
=========================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI

Date : 15/03/2021

ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for seeking the following reliefs :­ "7(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to declare and hold that the act on tehpart of the state authorities in not granting benefit of judgment dated 21.12.2018 passed in Special Civil Application no. 7462 of 2012 and other allied matters to the petitioners is illegal, unconstitutional and violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

(B) Your Lordship may be pleased to hold and declare that the petitioners are entitle to grant benefit of judgment dated 21.12.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No. 7462 of 2012 and other allied matters;

And Your Lordship may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or any other writ, directing the state authoriteis to grant benefit of judgment dated 21.12.2018 passed in Special Civil Application No. 7462 of 212 and other allied matters.

C/SCA/2638/2021 ORDER

(C ) Your Lordship may be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 office to decide the proposal forwarded by respondent no. 3 within a stipulated time frame.

(D) Pending admission and hearing of the present writ petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to not to change service condition of the petitioenrs herein.

(E) Your Lordship may be pleased to grant such other and further relief as may be deemed fit and proper in the interest of justice."

2. During the course of submission Mr. Rashesh Rindani, learned advocate for the petitioners has drawn attention of this Court to various documents attached to the petition compilation and precisely has submitted that though on number of occasion the proposals have been forwarded to consider the case of the petitioners in light of the decision dated 21.12.2018 rendered in Special Civil Application No. 7462 of 2012, so far the authority has not examined the proposals and not passed any order and as such, has requested the Court to dispose of the petition without going into the merit of the case and issue appropriate direction prescribing the time schedule to take appropriate decision in accordance with law and as such, has not offered any submission on any other contentions raised in the petition at this stage.

3. To this submission, Mr. Krutik Parikh, learned Assistant Governmnet Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondent authority has submitted that without expressing any opinion on merit on any of the contentions, if appropriate time schedule reasonable enough is prescribed by the Court, there shall be no objection for the authority to take appropriate decision in accordance with law and as such has requested jointly to

C/SCA/2638/2021 ORDER

dispose of the petition by issuing appropraite direction in this regard.

4. Having considered the submissions made by both the sides, the present petition is disposed of on the following line at this stage, which would meet the ends of justice since no decision is so far is taken.

4.1. Respondent no. 2 authority shall examine the pending representations and proposals of the petitioners with regard to the grievance raised in it and shall take appropriate decision in accordance with law and in view of the decision which is tried to be relied upon by the petitioners and shall passed a reasoned order as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of the receipt of the writ of this Court.

4.2. It is clarified by the Court that since not called upon, the Court has not expressed any opinion on merit with regard to any of the contentions raised in the petition and it would be independently open for the competent authority to take appropraite decision in view of the policy as well as keeping in view the proposition laid down by the decision as referred to above and shall pass an independent order.

5. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

Direct Service is permitted.

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J) /phalguni/