Gujarat High Court
Shantaben Manubhai Patel School Of ... vs Council Of Architecture & on 9 August, 2017
Author: S.G. Shah
Bench: S.G. Shah
C/SCA/14193/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14193 of 2017
==========================================================
SHANTABEN MANUBHAI PATEL SCHOOL OF STUDIES AND....Petitioner(s)
Versus
COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR UDAYAN P VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR NIRAJ ASHAR, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR VM DHOTRE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. MAYUR V DHOTARE, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.G. SHAH
Date : 09/08/2017
ORAL ORDER
Notice was issued to confirm the position from the respondents. Respondents have yet not filed duly affirmed reply, but only a draft copy of reply is placed on record. Considering the facts and circumstances emerging from record, more particularly, judgment and order dated 29.8.2016 in Special Civil Application No.12359 of 2016, it seems that there is reason to believe what is pleaded by the petitioner. Therefore, let there be interim relief in terms of paragraph 19(B). Learned advocate Mr. Dhotre for the respondent No.1 has submitted that judgment and order dated 29.8.2016 in Special Civil Application No.12359 of 2016 is under challenge in Letters Patent Appeal, however, in absence of any specific order in L.P.A., the judgment and Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Mon Aug 21 06:40:29 IST 2017 C/SCA/14193/2017 ORDER order remains in force. It is quite clear and obvious from material available on record that by all probabilities, respondent No.1 is taking revenge for filing such Special Civil Application No.12359 of 2016 by the petitioner. It is made clear that petitioner has to complete the formalities, if any, that may be required by respondent No.2. It is also further made clear that first round of admission is over and, therefore, such admission would be considered as if it is granted in second round. It is made clear that respondent No.1 has to proceed further in accordance with law pursuant to communication dated 21/22.7.2017 at Annexure-N (pages 67 & 68).
List the matter on 22.09.2017.
(S.G. SHAH, J.) binoy Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Mon Aug 21 06:40:29 IST 2017