Gujarat High Court
District Primary Education Committee vs Katara Ramanbhai Manglabhai on 28 July, 2025
Author: A.S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/884/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 884 of 2025
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20652 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025
In
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 884 of 2025
==========================================================
DISTRICT PRIMARY EDUCATION COMMITTEE
Versus
KATARA RAMANBHAI MANGLABHAI & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MANISH J PATEL(2131) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR AAKASH GUPTA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 28/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)
Learned advocate Mr.Patel appearing for the appellant - original
respondent No.3 has submitted that the order passed by the learned Single
Judge in the captioned writ petition on 17/06/2025 is required to be
quashed and set aside since the same is passed in absence of the
petitioner's Advocate and that too by recording that the submissions
made by learned advocates for the parties are considered. It is submitted
that the learned Single Judge has not considered as to whether the
judgment and order dated 13/09/2022 passed in SCA No.21562 of 2019
will actually apply to the facts of the case or not as no submissions are
advanced by the petitioner and the petitioner was not represented by any
Advocate.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/884/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
2. Learned AGP Mr.Aaaksh Gupta appearing for the respondent -
State has adopted the arguments advanced by learned Advocate Mr.Patel
for the appellant.
3. We have considered the order dated 17/06/2025 passed in the
captioned writ petition by the learned Single Judge. Relevant paragraph 2
to 5 of the order passed by the learned Single Judge reads thus:
"2. Though advocate notice is served, none appears for the
petitioner.
3. It is required to be noted that in the prayer, it is prayed to grant
relief in terms of the order judgment passed in Special Civil
Application No.21562 of 2019 dated 13.9.2022 and other similar
type of matters.
4. In view of the same, in view of the submissions made by learned
advocates for the parties, on perusal of the papers on record and
the judgment dated 13.9.2022 passed in Special Civil Application
Nos.21562 of 2019, this petition is required to be allowed.
5. Accordingly this petition allowed. The respondents are directed
to confer the benefit of lien to the petitioner/s in the District
Education Committee, Dahod, with all consequential benefits and
pass appropriate orders to that effect within a period of ten weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order."
4. Thus, the order-sheet reflects that no one had appeared on behalf of
the petitioner though the notice was served and in absence of the learned
advocate of the petitioner, the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/884/2025 ORDER DATED: 28/07/2025
undefined
petition by holding that the case of the petitioner is covered by the
judgment dated 13/09/2022 passed in SCA No.21562 of 2019. We find
that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is very cryptic in nature
and that too by recording that the submissions made by learned advocates
appearing for the parties are considered; though no one had appeared on
behalf of the petitioner.
5. In our considered opinion, either the writ petition could have been
dismissed for non-prosecution or further chance could have been awarded
to the petitioner to avail appropriate remedy of appointing a private
Advocate or the Advocate through Legal Aid. The learned Single Judge
fell in error in allowing the writ petition and directing the respondent that
case of the petitioner is required to be considered as per judgment dated
13/09/2022 passed in SCA No.21562 of 2019; without discussing the
facts and law on the said judgment as to whether the ratio of the said
judgment would apply to the case of the petitioner or not. Looking to the
nature of the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we have left with
no other option; but to set aside the impugned order. Accordingly, the
present appeal is allowed and the order dated 17/06/2025 passed in the
captioned writ petition is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded
back to learned Single Judge to decide the same afresh. Registry to do
the needful.
In view of the fact that present appeal is allowed, the connected
civil application is also disposed of.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J)
(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
sompura
