(Per : MR.JUSTICE J.N.BHATT) The appellant is the practising Lawyer, who has challenged the order of the learned Single Judge, passed on 13.3.2002 in Spl.C.A. No. 3027/2002, by invoking the aids of Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.
When the matter was called out more than once during the course of taking up admission matters, appellant nor his advocate or any representative appeared. Therefore, we waited and took up the matter later. Again same thing was repeated. Since the appellant is a practising Lawyer, he would have made some necessary arrangements in his absence, but alas, nothing has been done, leaving us to go through the entire record, the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge and the relevant latest proposition of law.
The petition came to be rejected on the ground that the prayer for extension of visa, which was given to the spouse of the original petitioner - appellant before us, who has been a national and resident of Pakistan, would not assume any survival value, as the spouse had already been deported to Pakistan. This finding and the ultimate conclusion reached by the learned Single Judge is based on an admitted factual profile that the spouse was not within the Indian territory, at the relevant time she has been deported. It is, therefore, very evident that the ultimate view reached by the learned Single Judge while rejecting the petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is quite justified, requiring no interference in exercise of our power under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent. Therefore, this Appeal shall stand dismissed at the threshold.
(J.N. Bhatt, J.) (J.R. Vora, J.) p.n.nair