Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Jayendrabhai Kashibhai Patel vs Principal Desai C M High School & 2 on 22 December, 2016

Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt

Bench: S.R.Brahmbhatt

                  C/SCA/5238/2005                                             JUDGMENT




                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                       SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5238 of 2005



         FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:



         HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT

         ==========================================================

         1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed
               to see the judgment ?

         2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

         3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of
               the judgment ?

         4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of
               law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of
               India or any order made thereunder ?

         ==========================================================
                     JAYENDRABHAI KASHIBHAI PATEL....Petitioner(s)
                                        Versus
                 PRINCIPAL DESAI C M HIGH SCHOOL & 2....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR RR VAKIL, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR LR POOJARI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 3
         MR MB PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1 - 3
         ==========================================================

             CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT

                                     Date : 22/12/2016


                                     ORAL JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 3

HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Fri Dec 23 00:16:18 IST 2016 C/SCA/5238/2005 JUDGMENT

1. Learned counsel, Mr. Vakil for the petitioner, has submitted that the original challenge to the order dated 15/12/2004 passed by respondent No.3 would fail of insignificance on account of the subsequent development during the pendency of this matter. The counsel invited this Court's attention to original order passed by this Court while issuing the notice that was on 25/3/2005 and submitted that thereafter, order was passed on 7/2/2006 by this Court and on 23/6/2010, these orders coupled with the fact that the petitioner was in fact permitted to discharge his duties as a Teacher throughout and even in 2006, he was permitted to discharge his duties as a Physics Teacher and in 2010, he came to be in the main stream by getting placement under the Direct Payment Scheme. The only grievance which is left out is the services rendered in the interregnum period for which, he may be permitted to approach the concerned respondent Commissioner of Schools for seeking appropriate relief and in case if there is adverse decision, liberty be reserved to challenge the same. The counsel for the petitioner also urged that the petitioner may also be given liberty to raise all the grounds which have been raised in this petition for challenging the subsequent order that may be passed in case if it is not in his favour so as to seek appropriate relief including the relief that may have been prayed in this petition without there being any plea of res-judicata or constructive res-judicata.

2. Mr. Poojari, learned AGP, has no objection and urged Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Fri Dec 23 00:16:18 IST 2016 C/SCA/5238/2005 JUDGMENT the Court that all the contentions may be kept open to all the sides.

3. In view thereof, the permission as sought for is granted. The petition is disposed of with the aforesaid liberty. Rule is discharged. It is observed that in case if there is any adverse order, it would be open to the petitioner to challenge the same by incorporating the grounds which have been taken in the petition also, as this Court's attention is not invited to the final merits.

(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) RADHAN Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Fri Dec 23 00:16:18 IST 2016