Heard Mr. DR Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms. Vashi, learned advocate for respondent no. 1 (who has appeared on caveat).
In the present petition, the petitioner has brought under challenge order dated 6/5/2011 passed by Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal in Appeal No. 4/2010, whereby learned Tribunal has allowed the Appeal preferred by the present respondent no. 1 Institute.
The said decision of learned Tribunal has resulted into approval of the proposal of the Management to terminate the service of present petitioner.
Being aggrieved by the said decision, petitioner has preferred present petition.
However, during the hearing of present petition, it emerged that after the decision dated 6/5/2011, respondent no. 1 Institute has passed the order, terminating service of present petitioner.
Thereafter, petitioner herein has already preferred Substantive Application before learned Tribunal, wherein the petitioner has challenged the said termination order.
Ms.
Vashi, learned advocate for the respondent no. 1 Institute submitted that respondent no. 1 Institute has already passed termination order, therefore, challenge against the order passed by learned Tribunal in Appeal No. 104/2011 would now not survive. She further submitted that since the petitioner has preferred Substantive Application, it will be decided by learned Tribunal on its merits. Therefore, also present petition may not entertain by this Court.
In that view of the matter, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would now prosecute said Substantive Application preferred before learned Tribunal, however, the order passed in Appeal No. 4/2010 and the observations may not adversely affect the case of the petitioner, which is before the Tribunal by way of application no. 104/2011.
Having regard to the submission made by learned Counsel for the petitioner, present petition can be disposed of in light of the fact that Substantive Application challenging termination order is now pending with the learned Tribunal and the petitioner desires to prosecute the said application. Therefore, below mentioned order is passed.
The present petition is disposed of in view of the fact that the applicant has now preferred Substantive Application challenging termination order.
Therefore, present petition does not deserve to be entertained at this stage.
Learned Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner would prosecute the Application No. 104/2011 before learned Tribunal and in that view of the matter, the petitioner does not press present petition at this stage.
It is clarified that learned Tribunal shall hear and decide the Application no. 104/2011 in accordance with law purely on its merits without being influenced by any other order including the order passed in Appeal no. 4/2010. The necessary order in respect of Application no. 104/2011 will be passed by learned Tribunal after hearing the contesting parties and on the basis of evidence which may be made available on record of application no. 104/2011 by the contesting parties.
In light of the aforesaid clarification, present petition is disposed of.
(K.M.THAKER, J) *asma Top