(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.H.WAGHELA) The petition is misconceived insofar as the impugned direction dated 13th October 2011 issued to the petitioner by Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, in Original Application No.193 of 2011 is to undertake necessary exercise, and while undertaking such exercise if there are any legal issues arising from the difficulties faced by the petitioner, they cannot be grounds to challenge the original order, particularly, when such directions were issued after granting opportunities to the petitioner and without any specific direction to make any particular order. In fact, there appears to be a dispute between original respondent nos.1 and 2 and respondent no.3, and if that be so, it has to be resolved in a separate proceeding which may be initiated by the party aggrieved by execution of the impugned direction. Therefore, the petition is summarily dismissed without dealing with and commenting upon the stand taken by the petitioner or respondent nos.2 and 3.
(D.H.Waghela, J.) (G.B.Shah, J.) *malek Top