Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 257 (GUJ)

PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE v. STATE OF GUJARAT

2018-01-25

BIREN VAISHNAV, M.R.SHAH

body2018
JUDGMENT : M.R. SHAH, J. 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned ad-interim/ interim order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 14.09.2017 in Special Civil Application No.16628/2017, the learned Single Judge has granted the interim relief in terms of paragraph 8(C), which reads as under: “Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay execution, implementation and operation of the order No.893 of 2017 dated 1/3.08.2017 as per Ann: A, as the Promotees bailiff are directed to work on the Post of Class IV due to shortage of staff and actually they have not taken over the charge of bailiff, till the final disposal of this petition;” 2. Number of submissions have been made by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants on grant of the interim relief in terms of paragraph 8(C). However, Shri Anand Sharma, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the original petitioners, under the instructions from the original petitioners has stated at the Bar that the original petitioners have no objection if the impugned order granting interim relief in terms of paragraph 8(C) of the main petition is quashed and set aside and the learned Single Judge is requested to consider the petition on merits and in accordance with law. However, has requested to make suitable observations that the same shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the original petitioners in the main petition. Shri Sharma, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the original petitioners does not invite any further reasoned order as the main petition is yet to be considered by the learned Single Judge on merits. Under the circumstances, while quashing and setting aside the impugned interim order dated 14.09.2017 granting interim relief in terms of paragraph 8(C) of the petition, we are not assigning any further reasons. 3. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present Letters Patent Appeal succeeds. Impugned order dated 14.09.2017 in Special Civil Application No.16628/2017 more particularly granting interim relief in terms of paragraph 8(C) is hereby quashed and set aside. 3. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present Letters Patent Appeal succeeds. Impugned order dated 14.09.2017 in Special Civil Application No.16628/2017 more particularly granting interim relief in terms of paragraph 8(C) is hereby quashed and set aside. However, it is observed that the learned Single Judge to decide and dispose of the main petition in accordance with law and on its own merits and without in anyway being influenced by the present order as the present Letters Patent Appeal is against the impugned order challenging the interim order. Therefore, the learned Single Judge to decide and dispose of the main petition in accordance with law and on its own merits. Present Letters Patent Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.17228/2017 In view of the disposal of main Letters Patent Appeal, Civil Application No.17228/2017 also stands disposed of.