This matter was mentioned in the morning for adjournment on behalf of learned advocate Shri Upadyay for the petitioner. The Court had not accepted the request for adjournment. Thereafter, it was called out twice, on both the occasions, no one has remained present.
Learned advocate for the respondents is present.
The Court is of the view that this matter is required to be disposed of only on the ground of availability of alternative remedy.
The petitioner, by way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the order dated 30.5.2012 passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (Rural), Mirzapur, Ahmedabad, imposing penalty of removal under Rule 6(7) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1971 without attaching any disqualification for future employment in Government. Learned advocate for respondents has invited this court s attention to Rule 18 of the Rules and submitted that the appeal is expressly provided thereunder and this Rules i.e. the Gujarat Civil Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules 1971 are framed in exercise of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and as such, when there is statutory appeal available, writ petition would not be entertained.
The Court is in complete agreement with the submission canvassed on behalf of learned advocate for respondents. The petition is dismissed only on that count i.e. availability of alternative remedy. The Court has not examined anything on merits. It would be open to the petitioner to file an appeal, if permissible, under law. Hence, the petition is dismissed. Notice discharged. There shall be no order as to costs.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) pallav Page 2 of 2