Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1235 (GUJ)

State of Gujarat v. Sujalkumar Maheshbhai Parmar

2017-07-04

B.N.KARIA, M.R.SHAH

body2017
ORDER : M.R SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 12436/2015 by which the learned Single Judge has allowed the Special Civil Application preferred by the respondents herein, the appellants herein-State has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal. 2. When the present Appeal was taken up for hearing before the Division Bench on 02/02/2016 statement of Shri G.M Joshi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents-original petitioners was recorded that if the original petitioners are absorbed in the cadre of Revenue Talati at Chhota Udepur District they would be agreeable. 3. Today when the present Appeal is taken up for further hearing, Shri Dhawan Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader has stated at the bar that so far as respondents nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 are concerned they are already appointed on regular basis as Revenue Talati in Chhota Udepur District. He has produced on record the orders passed by the competent authority appointing them on regular basis as Revenue Talati in Chhota Udepur District, which are directed to taken on record. Under the circumstances and considering the earlier order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 02/02/2016 and when now respondents nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 are already appointed on regular basis as Revenue Talati at Chhota Udepur District, the present Appeal qua them deserves to be disposed of by further observing that in view of the subsequent development and the stand taken by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents herein recorded in the order dated 02/02/2016, the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Jude is not required to be further implemented. 4. Shri Dhawan Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader has stated at the bar that so far as respondents nos. 4 and 5 are concerned they are not appointed on regular basis as Revenue Talati at Chhota Udepur as they have not passed/cleared the departmental examination. It is stated by Shri Dhawan Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader that as and when they clear the departmental examination for the post of Revenue Talati, their case shall be considered for appointment on regular basis. Concerned appellants are directed to act accordingly. 5. With this, the present Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 828/2016 6. It is stated by Shri Dhawan Jayswal, learned Assistant Government Pleader that as and when they clear the departmental examination for the post of Revenue Talati, their case shall be considered for appointment on regular basis. Concerned appellants are directed to act accordingly. 5. With this, the present Letters Patent Appeal stands disposed of. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 828/2016 6. In view of disposal of the Letters Patent Appeal, no order in the Civil Application and the same stands disposed of.