Gujarat High Court
Bhoopatsinh Ramubhai Gohil vs Directorate Of Animal Husbandry & 3 on 4 April, 2017
Author: S.G. Shah
Bench: S.G. Shah
C/SCA/4857/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4857 of 2017
==========================================================
BHOOPATSINH RAMUBHAI GOHIL....Petitioner(s)
Versus
DIRECTORATE OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY & 3....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR MM TIRMIZI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR KM ANTANI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. SHAH
Date : 4/04/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. It seems that there are several petitions claiming similar relief which were granted by judgment and order dated 08.11.2016 in SCA No. 18497 of 2016 with allied matters wherein para 6 to 10 reads as under :
"6. The coordinate Bench (Coram: N.V.Anjaria, J.) in the case of Abbasbhai Najmuddinbhai Barad and others vs. State of Gujarat rendered in Special Civil Application No.12075 of 2016 on 3.8.2016 decided along the same lines.
7. In all such other petitions interim relief had been granted by this Court. Interim relief granted in Special Civil Application No. 10617 of 2016 and other allied matters Page 1 of 5 HC-NIC Page 1 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 05:20:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/4857/2017 ORDER deserves to be granted in case of the present petition along the line of directing the respondents to pay HRA and CLA at the rate applicable in case of the present petitioners.
8. The petitioners' right shall be governed by the decision of Nitinkumar C. Patel(supra). The petitioners also shall file an undertaking to the effect that in the event of any loss, they shall refund the amount with 9% interest.
9. The petition is allowed in the above terms. If the outcome of the committee report aggrieves the petitioners,they shall be at liberty to challenge the same taking the legal recourse.
10. This Court has not entered into the merits of the case. The petitions stand disposed of.
Direct service is permitted."
2. Therefore if we refer the case of Nitinkumar C. Patel which is referred in para 8 of above referred judgment being judgment dated 05.07.2016 in SCA No. 1791 of 2007 between Nitinkumar C. Patel and others vs. State of Gujarat and another, it becomes clear that even in the case of Nitinkumar C. Patel (supra), the co-ordinate bench has passed following orders:
Page 2 of 5
HC-NIC Page 2 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 05:20:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/4857/2017 ORDER "38 In view of the above, I pass the following order:
(I) The State Government will constitute a committee, as noted above, at the earliest, and the committee shall make all possible endevours to see that an appropriate decision is taken within a period of six months from the date of the constitution of the committee.
(II) The representatives of the writ applicants shall appear before the committee and make their submissions.
(III) The committee shall hear those representatives on behalf of the writ applicants.
(IV) It shall be open for the
representatives to file their written
submissions with the necessary materials in that regard.
(V) The adinterim relief, which is operating in favour of each of the writ applicants, shall continue till an appropriate decision is taken by the committee, and the report is filed before the State Government. The adinterim relief shall also continue thereafter i.e. after the report of the committee for a further period of two months.
(VI) The undertakings given earlier by the writ applicants shall continue to operate till the decision is taken by the committee.
VII.The committee shall give detailed reasons in support of its conclusion."
3. Therefore, the State Government is required to constitute a committee as noted in above referred decisions at the Page 3 of 5 HC-NIC Page 3 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 05:20:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/4857/2017 ORDER earliest and such committee shall make all endeavor to see that an appropriate decision is taken within a period of 6 months from the date of constitution of such committee. The committee was directed to hear representations on behalf of the applications permitting them to file the written submissions.
4. Therefore, when there are several petitions filed before this Court with a simple request to pass similar order as passed in SCA No. 1791 of 2007 so also in SCA No. 18497 of 2016 and allied matters, there is no reason to entertain all such applications frequently and repeatedly i.e. on daily basis, more particularly when respondent- State has never came forward to disclose that whether they have complied with the above referred two judgments of co-ordinate bench or not or that whether they have challenged such judgment before higher authority. In any case, when this Court has already directed the Government to constitute a committee and to decide the issue raised in such petitions which is obligatory for the State to comply with such order, if such order is not challenged before the higher authority and to disclose its outcome to the Court, more particularly, when period of 6 months has already been over. Therefore, all such petitions cannot be entertained Page 4 of 5 HC-NIC Page 4 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 05:20:53 IST 2017 C/SCA/4857/2017 ORDER only for passing similar orders as prayed for without verifying the outcome and execution of judgment and order dated 05.07.2016 in SCA No. 1791 of 2007.
5. In view of above facts, respondents are directed to disclose the compliance of such judgment and order dated 05.07.2016 in SCA No. 1791 of 2007 on or before 18.04.2017.
(S.G. SHAH, J.) MAYA Page 5 of 5 HC-NIC Page 5 of 5 Created On Mon Aug 14 05:20:53 IST 2017