Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. At the very outset, before embarking upon the hearing of this petition, it was pointed out to the learned counsel for the respective parties that I was one of the members of the Division Bench which passed order dated 23-10-2007 and whether the parties have any objection, if the petition, which has been placed before me as per the prevailing roster, is heard and decided by me. Mr.Ashish H.Shah for Mr.Harin P.Raval, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Tushar Mehta, learned counsel for the respondents Nos.5 and 6, Mr.Paresh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents Nos.7,9 to 14 and Mr.Vaibhav A.Vyas, learned counsel for the respondent No.8 have stated at the Bar that they have no objection if the matter is heard by this court. Therefore, the petition has been finally heard by me.

On the basis of the above submissions, Mr.Tushar Mehta has prayed that the petition be dismissed.

10. Mr.Paresh Upadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents Nos.7,9 to 14 and Mr.Vaibhav A.Vyas, learned counsel for the respondent No.8 have, in effect, supported and reiterated the arguments put forth by Mr.Tushar Mehta. In addition, it is submitted on behalf of the respondents Nos.7 to 14 that they were appointed after following the proper procedure and had been working for a period of about one year, when their services came to be discontinued, as a result of the order of this Court. It is prayed by Mr.Paresh Upadhyay and Mr.Vaibhav A.Vyas that since the matter has been remitted in order to arrive at a finding of fact, this Court may not interfere with the order dated 30-7-2007, and the petition may be dismissed.