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

Haroon vs Director

High Court Of Gujarat|12 April, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard Mr. Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Mr. Niraj Ashar, learned AGP, for the respondent - State.
2. Under order dated 27.9.2011, the Court directed the registry to issue a Notice, which was made returnable on 13.10.2011.
3. Thereafter and until now, any reply affidavit has not been filed by the respondent authorities to resist the petition and/or to place any material on record to oppose the relief prayed for by the petitioner.
4. Having regard to the inaction on the part of the respondents, not only with respect to making any appropriate order with reference to the petitioner and his request, but also with regard to the direction passed by the Court, order dated 2.2.2012 came to be passed wherein the Court observed that:-
"This Court (Coram : Anant S. Dave, J.) on 27.9.2011 was pleased to pass the following order :
"
Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr. Mukul Sinha for the petitioner, who submits that inspite of repeated representations and reminders to decide their case in terms of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court by a judgment and order dated 17.02.2011 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.2277/2010 in Special Civil Application No.3739/2010, the authorities have not clarified as to how long the service of the petitioner is required at the place of transfer.
2.In view of the above, issue NOTICE returnable on 13th October, 2011. Direct Service is permitted."
2. Till date no Affidavit-in-Reply is filed. The respondents are therefore directed to file their Affidavit-in-Reply on or before 21.02.2012. Rejoinder, if any, may be filed by 24.2.2012. S.O. to 28.2.2012."
5. Even after the said order, any actions have not been taken by the respondent authorities inasmuch as any order with reference to petitioner's request has not been passed nor any affidavit in reply resisting the petition and relief prayed for by the petitioner has been filed. Ultimately, the Court had to pass order dated 30.3.2012, which read thus:-
"Specific directions were passed under order dated 2nd February 2012, however, the said directions have not been complied with by the respondents. The respondents also did not care to seek the extension of time to comply the directions. Any request either in writing or oral until now has not been made for extension of time to comply the directions passed under order dated 2nd February 2012.
As a last chance, time is extended until 11th April 2012. If the said directions are not complied then the default will be considered as contemptuous action. S.O. to 11th April 2012."
6. Even after the said order dated 30.3.2012, the respondents have not taken any action until now.
7. Today also, learned AGP has requested for further time. On top of that, learned AGP also submitted that the respondent authorities are considering to prefer further proceedings against the impugned order dated 17.2.2011.
More than one year has passed since the said order dated 17.2.2011.
8. It is pertinent to note that the said order came to be passed in the appeal preferred by the petitioner of present petition. Differently put, the said order has been passed in petitioner's own case and yet any action in accordance with the said order passed by the Division Bench, has not been taken by the respondent authorities.
9. Therefore, the Court is constrained to pass following order:-
9.1 Rule.
9.2 By way of interim relief, the respondent authorities are directed to take appropriate decision and pass appropriate order in consonance with the decision dated 17.2.2011 passed by the Division Bench in LPA No.2277 of 2010.
Such decision shall be taken by the respondent - competent authority within period of 10 days from the service of copy of this order.
It would be open to the petitioner to serve a copy of present order to the respondent - competent authority.
9.3 The respondent - competent authority shall keep in focus the observations and directions made by the Court in order dated 17.2.2011 and the decision which may be taken shall be conveyed to the petitioner immediately.
It will be open to the petitioner to place the decision of the respondent - competent authority on record of present petition.
With the aforesaid observations and direction, present petition stands disposed of.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc 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

Haroon vs Director

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
12 April, 2012