Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat & vs Bl Dave & on 5 July, 2016
Author: C.L.Soni
Bench: C.L. Soni
C/CA/11518/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 11518 of
2014
In
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION (STAMP NUMBER) NO. 2531 of 2014
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3938 of 1992
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Applicant(s)
Versus
BL DAVE & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SOAHAM JOSHI, ASSTT GOVT PLEADER for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 2
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI
Date : 05/07/2016
ORAL ORDER
1. By present application, the applicants seek to condone delay of 377 days in filing Misc. Civil Application for review/ modification of the judgment/ order dated 19.7.2013.
2. By judgment dated 19.7.2013, this Court directed the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion with effect from the date the DPC met on 14.9.1987 irrespective of and ignoring the adverse entry for the year 1986-87 with deemed date of promotion notionally from the said date till the opponent No.1- original petitioner was actually promoted to the post of Class-I cadre on 23.7.1993. In the said judgment, this Court made it clear that the petitioner shall be entitled to such notional benefit of deemed date and other consequential benefits only if he succeeds in his challenge against the order of dismissal passed against him.
Page 1 of 2HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Jul 08 03:03:27 IST 2016 C/CA/11518/2014 ORDER
3. As stated by learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Joshi, the main ground for review is that the opponent No.1 suppressed material fact that before this Court passed judgment dated 19.7.2013, his petition, being Special Civil Application No.8684 of 2013, against the order of his dismissal from service was disposed of vide order dated 9.5.2013 and if this Court was informed about such important fact about disposal of his petition, the Court would not have given direction to consider his case for promotion.
4. The Court finds that the order/ judgment made by this Court was with rider that the petitioner would get benefit of promotion only on his succeeding in his petition against the order of his dismissal from service. Therefore, even if the fact about disposal of his above petition was not brought to the notice of this Court by opponent No.1, same would not make any difference as the opponent No.1 was not to get any benefit on the basis of the direction issued by this Court because, his dismissal from service stood confirmed by disposal of his petition by order dated 9.5.2013.
5. In above such view of the matter, no purpose will be served to consider the application seeking condonation of delay as even if delay is to be condoned, the application for review will be required to be disposed of on above stated reasoning. Hence, the present application is not entertained and stands disposed of accordingly.
(C.L.SONI, J.) Omkar Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Jul 08 03:03:27 IST 2016