Disposed

Virendrakumar Pravinchandra Maheta v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC9 Dec 2020SCA/15040/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a public interest litigation regarding withheld salary grants for a trust-run school, the High Court held that extraordinary jurisdiction was not appropriate while a statutory appeal was pending. The court directed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority for interim relief within one week. The appellate authority was instructed to consider such requests expeditiously, preferably with

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of; the petitioner was directed to approach the appellate authority for interim relief within one week.

Virendrakumar Pravinchandra Maheta Vs State… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

C/SCA/15040/2020 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15040 of 2020

¶4

==========================================================

¶5

VIRENDRAKUMAR PRAVINCHANDRA MAHETA

¶6

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT

¶7

==========================================================

¶8

Appearance:

¶9

MR M T SAIYAD(3848) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 MS MEGHA CHITALIYA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

==========================================================

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI

¶12

Date : 09/12/2020

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for the purpose of seeking following reliefs :

¶15

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue appropriate writ/order direction by or quashing and setting aside the order dated 19/09/2019 passed by the District Education Officer, Panchmahal i.e. the respondent no.2 herein of withholding 25% grant of salary to be received by the Smt.C.B. Girls High School run by the trust of the petitioner and also further be pleased to direct the respondent no.2 to release the amount of the grant forthwith in the interest of justice;

¶16

(B) During the pendency and/or Final Disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct respondent no.2 herein not to demand the amount from the trust of the petitioner pursuance the order of withholding 25% grant from the salary grant and also be pleased to stay the letter dated 14/11/2019 written by the respondent no. 2 in the interest of justice;

¶17

(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the Commissionerate of Schools, State of Gujarat, Gandhinagar i.e. the respondent no. 3 herein to hear the

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

C/SCA/15040/2020 ORDER

¶20

appeal filed by the petitioner herein against the order dated 19/09/2019 passed by the respondent no. 2 herein as expeditious as possible in the interest of justice;

¶21

(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to pass such other and further appropriate orders as this Honourable court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

¶22

The essential grievance which has been raised is about the salary grant-cut which was made by the concerned District Education Officer, Panchmahals and recovery is sought. Felt aggrieved by the same, a specific appeal along with stay application has already been moved by the petitioner which is reflecting on page-31 as pointed out by the learned advocate for the petitioner. The grievance is that the appellate authority has yet not examined nor even dealt with either appeal memo or interim relief application and on the other hand, the respondent authority is insisting for recovery as indicated in the petition. For the purpose of this sole grievance for the moment, the present petitioner has approached this Court by way of invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.

¶23

When confronted with the situation as to whether the appeal is precipitated or not by the petitioner, learned advocate has submitted that the authority is not in a mood to proceed ahead with the appeal memo for the time being and, therefore, learned advocate has requested that the petition may be disposed of with some direction, so that the interim relief application submitted, at least that can be considered by the appellate authority for the time being during the pendency of the main appeal. However, the learned advocate has not called upon to examine merit in view of the fact that statutory appeal is

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

C/SCA/15040/2020 ORDER

¶26

pending.

¶27

To this submission, Ms.Megha Chitaliya, learned Assistant Government Pleader has no reservation if the petition is disposed of with some suitable directions.

¶28

Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and having gone through the grievance voiced out in the petition, it seems that against the main grievance of salary grant-cut and the recovery, a specific appeal as per the Statute is filed by the petitioner and the same is undisputedly so far pending as on date with an application for interim relief. That being the position, this Court would not like to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction at this stage in view of the fact that statutory appellate forum is seized with the proceedings and is yet to exercise the jurisdiction. That being so, without expressing any opinion with regard to any of the contentions raised in the petition, the present petition deserves to be disposed of in light of following directions which would meet the ends of justice.

¶29

(1) The petitioner is permitted to approach the appellate authority where the appeal along with interim relief application is pending, with a request to consider and examine at this stage the interim relief application during the pendency and final disposal of the main appeal.

¶30

(2) As and when the petitioner approaches the appellate authority with aforesaid request, the appellate authority shall consider and examine and pass suitable orders in the interest of justice on pending interim relief application in accordance with

¶31

Page 3 of 4

¶32

C/SCA/15040/2020 ORDER

¶33

law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner – appellant.

¶34

(3) Since the decision-making process is left it to the discretion of the appellate authority, this Court has not expressed any opinion on merit with regard to any of the contentions of the petitioner and it is independently left it open for the appellate authority to consider the request of the petitioner – appellant.

¶35

(4) As and when step to be taken by the appellate authority for considering the request of the petitioner for interim relief, the same shall be dealt with as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 3 weeks from the date of approach made by the petitioner. However, it is made clear that the petitioner shall approach the appellate authority within a period of one week from today.

¶36

With these observations and directions, the present petition stands disposed of.

¶37

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J)

¶38

DHARMENDRA KUMAR

¶39

Page 4 of 4

Virendrakumar Pravinchandra Maheta v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Virendrakumar Pravinchandra Maheta v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Abizar Hatimbhai Umrethwala Vs Union of India

Arun Prahaladbhai Thakor Vs State of Gujarat

Re Aliporiya Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs State of Gujarat

Rajesh Prafulbhai Vyas Vs Shri Ishwarnagar Co. Op. Hou. Soc. Ltd.

Municipal Commissioner, Vadodara Municipal Corporation Vs Vishnubahi Ramchandra Kahar

Kantaben Dhanabhai Ravat Vs State of Gujarat