Gujarat High Court
SCA/1807/1992 of P V SHUKLA Vs DY. CONSERVATOR OF FOREST on 19 December 2003
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 1807 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 1807 of 1992
For Approval and Signature:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
============================================================
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO
to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO
of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- P V SHUKLAVersus DY. CONSERVATOR OF FOREST
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
1. Special Civil Application No. 1807 of 1992 MRS MADHUBEN SHARMA for Petitioner No. 1 MR MENGDEY, AGP for Respondent No. 1
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date of decision: 19/12/2003
ORAL JUDGEMENT
Heard learned advocate Mrs. Madhuben Sharma for petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Mengdey appearing on behalf of respondent.
2. The grievance voiced in the present petition by the petitioner is that his case for Forest Guard is not considered by the department though he was called for interview but there is no positive reply that he was not suitable for the post of Forest Guard. Learned advocate Mrs. Shrama has submitted that on various occasions the representation has been made by the petitioner to the respondent with a request to consider his case for the post of Forest Guard as similar other situated employees have been considered by the department. In view of this fact, it is directed to the respondent to reconsider the case of the petitioner for the post of Forest Guard and pass appropriate orders in accordance with rules and regulations within one week from the date of receiving the copy of this order.
3. In view of the above observation and direction present petition is disposed of. Rule is discharged. As the main petition is disposed of, Civil Application No. 6367 of 2003 is also disposed of accordingly.
�����(H.K.Rathod,J)
Jayanti*