Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Seema vs Life

High Court Of Gujarat|12 March, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE) Heard learned advocate Mr. Singh. He states that there was a miscommunication from him in respect of promotions being given to the juniors to petitioner. In fact, only some of the juniors have been given promotions.
2. This Court, while passing the oral order on 1st February, 2012, has observed that; "Learned advocate Mr. Singh for the appellant submitted that those persons, who have been given appointment, were down below in the select list than the present petitioner and the petitioner is not given appointment, which has caused injustice to them and, therefore, this appeal may be entertained."
3. According to learned advocate Mr. Singh, case of the appellant is that only some of the persons, who are down below in the list, have been given appointment, whose names have been stated in the petition.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Singh never objected to when we recorded submissions in our oral order dated 1st February, 2012 in his presence and even as per this note, there was a mistake on the part of the advocate for the appellant in communicating the correct fact, which can hardly be a ground for allowing a note for speaking to minutes.
5. Learned advocate for the appellant, by this note for speaking to minutes, proposes to bring correct facts on record, which ought to have been done at the time of making submissions when the oral order dated 1st February, 2012 was passed by this Court. However, this note seems to have been filed to save the appellant from the rigor of an incorrect statement, if not false. Let the litigant not suffer on this account. This note for speaking to minutes is, therefore, allowed. Paragraph 3 of the said oral order dated 1st February, 2012 shall now read as under :
"3. Learned advocate Mr. Singh for the appellant submitted that some of those persons, who have been given appointment, were down below in the select list than the present petitioner and the petitioner is not given appointment, which has caused injustice to her and therefore, this appeal may be entertained."
6. This note for speaking to minutes is disposed of accordingly.
[A.L.
Dave, J.] [Mohinder Pal, J.] #MH Dave Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Seema vs Life

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
12 March, 2012