1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2013
  6. /
  7. January

Jagdishbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat Through ...

High Court Of Gujarat|20 September, 2013
1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner.
2. In this petition, notice was issued on 22.4.2013 making it returnable on 20.6.2013. It appears that on 12.9.2013, learned advocate for the petitioner had canvassed his submissions but in view of leave note of Mr. M.D. Pandya, learned advocate for respondent No.2, the matter was adjourned and following order was passed.
Today, when the matter is called out, learned counsel for the petitioner is present and submissions are canvassed in support of the averments made in the petition.
Learned AGP is present.
Mr. M.D.Pandya, learned advocate for the respondent No.2, has filed leave note upto 13.9.2013.
If no representation is made on behalf of respondent No.2 on the next date of hearing, order in accordance with law will be passed after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGP.
Stand over to 20.9.2013.
3. Even today, there is leave note of Mr. M.D. Pandya learned advocate for respondent No.2.
4. In the above circumstances, if no reply is filed or no representation is made on next date i.e. 4.10.2013, this Court will have to direct Chief Executive Officer, Vadodara Urban Development Corporation, to remain personally present.
5. Direct service is permitted.
(ANANT S.DAVE, J.) SMITA Page 2 of 2
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.