Gujarat High Court
Gujarat State Road Transport ... vs Sukhubha Vilubha Gohil on 16 January, 2014
Author: Ks Jhaveri
Bench: Ks Jhaveri, A.G.Uraizee
C/LPA/2037/2011 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 2037 of 2011
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9385 of 2005
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
================================================================
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, 1950 or any
order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
================================================================
GUJARAT STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION....Appellant(s)
Versus
SUKHUBHA VILUBHA GOHIL....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR ASHISH M DAGLI, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR GK RATHOD, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR MUKESH H RATHOD, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
Page 1 of 2
C/LPA/2037/2011 JUDGMENT
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.G.URAIZEE
Date : 16/01/2014
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)
1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.9385/2005 dated 06.07.2011 by which the said petition was dismissed.
2. Heard. In light of a recent decision rendered by the Larger Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No.596/2008 and allied matters dated 26.12.2013, the present appeal is not maintainable since the appellant had not made the Tribunal concerned a party-respondent in the captioned petition.
3. In view of the above and without entering into the merits of the case, the appeal is not entertained and is disposed of. We clarify that the appellant shall be at liberty to challenge the impugned order before the appropriate forum and that delay occurred in challenging the impugned order would not come in the way of the appellant in such proceedings. Interim relief granted earlier shall continue for a further period of twelve weeks from today.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (A.G.URAIZEE,J)
Pravin
Page 2 of 2