(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the petition with a view to approach the appellate authority by filing appeal as provided under the statute. He submitted that the petitioner would also be, along with such appeal present application for condonation of delay primarily, on the ground that the petitioner was pursuing his remedies before this Court in the present petition. Counsel pointed out that this petition was not only entertained but was also admitted by this Court. Counsel stated that the petitioner has not filed any appeal in the past.
Learned counsel Shr Oza for the department stated that he has no instructions whether the petitioner had in the past filed any appeal and liberty even if is to be granted should be subject to the condition that such appeal should not have been filed in the past.
Under the circumstances, the petition is disposed of as withdrawn. It will be open for the petitioner to approach the appellate authority. If they do so within a period of four weeks from today and also pray for condonation of delay, we are sure the appellate authority shall bear in mind the fact that during the intervening period, the petitioner was pursuing his remedies before this court in the present petition. It is needless to observe that such right of appeal would be available only if the petitioner had not previously filed any appeal which was decided by the appellate authority. We have expressed no opinion on any of the issues arising in this petition keeping all contentions of both sides open. Disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged. Interim relief vacated.
(Akil Kureshi,J.) (Harsha Devani,J.) (raghu) Top