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 5]

Gujarat High Court

Dhrutaben N Patel & vs State Of Gujarat & on 6 December, 2016

Author: S.G. Shah

Bench: S.G. Shah

                   C/SCA/1082/2010                                              ORDER



            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
                       SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION  NO. 1082 of 2010

         =============================================
                            DHRUTABEN N PATEL  &  1....Petitioner(s)
                                          Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT  &  1....Respondent(s)
         =============================================
         Appearance:
         MR. BK. RAJ, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 ­ 2
         DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         MS AMITA SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
         RULE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         =============================================
           CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. SHAH
                               Date : 06/12/2016
                                 ORAL ORDER

[1] It   seems   that   respondents   have   taken   a  different stand before this Court while defending  this   petition.   Inasmuch   as,   though,   in   impugned  order,   it   is   stated   that   application   of   the  petitioner   is   not   considered   because   of   her  income, now, in affidavit in reply, it has been  stated   that   petitioner   has   remained   silent   for  nine years though some information was sought for  on 1.1.1993, contending that, thereafter, it was  responded only on 6.9.2002. Respondent has failed  to   realize   that   in   the   year   1993,   present  petitioner   was   minor   and,   therefore,   she   could  Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Wed Dec 07 02:11:53 IST 2016 C/SCA/1082/2010 ORDER not apply for compassionate appointment but, she  has applied only in the year 2001. On such count,  it is submitted that even then the petition is at  belated stage because the person died in the year  1991.

[2] Therefore,   it   would   be   appropriate   for  the respondent to first of all disclose on oath  about   their   policy   supported   by   concerned  Government   Resolution   regarding   granting  compassionate   appointment   to   the   minors   of   the  deceased   Government   employee,   at   the   relevant  time i.e. in the year 1991, so also in the year  2001. Respondents are also directed to produce on  record   the   communication   referred   by   them   in  paragraph 4 of their affidavit in reply.

Stand over to 22.12.2016.

(S.G. SHAH, J.) * Vatsal Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Wed Dec 07 02:11:53 IST 2016