Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Champaben vs Ahmedabad

High Court Of Gujarat|27 June, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
"(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to allow this Special Civil Application;
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing to quash and set aside the impugned action of the respondent in not deciding the representation made by the petitioner dated 19.04.2012 and thereby further be pleased to direct the respondent to decide the representation of the petitioner within stipulated period of two weeks or any stipulated period fixed by the Honourable Court and thereby quashed and set aside the impugned action of the respondent which is violative of Articles 14,19,21 of the Constitution of India;
(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, by way of ad-interim relief, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representation dated 19.04.2012 made by the petitioner sympathetically;
(D) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant such other and further relief that may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
2. It transpires from the record that, in fact, the petitioner has been granted accommodation as per the Scheme of respondent No.2.
3. The present petition is filed on the basis of the fact that the petitioner has filed representation dated 19.04.2012 for another accommodation in place of accommodation already granted to her, which is pending for its consideration before the respondent-authorities.
4. The petition is not required to be entertained at this stage as it is the function of the respondent-authorities and it is governed by the policy.
5. No interference is called for by this Court in its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
6. Hence, the petition is misconceived and is hereby dismissed.
7. However, it would be open for the petitioner to pursue said representation dated 19.04.2012 before the respondent-authorities and the respondent-authorities may consider it, if the same is in accordance with law.
(R.M.CHHAYA, J.) Hitesh Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Champaben vs Ahmedabad

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
27 June, 2012