JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)We have heard Shri Yatin N. Oza, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Tushar Sheth,
learned counsel for the appellants, Ms. Manisha
L. Shah, learned Government Pleader for the State
respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and Shri K.B.Pujara,
learned counsel for the private respondent Nos.3
to 60.
(2.)This appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been preferred assailing the
correctness of the order dated 28.02.2020 passed
by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil
Application No.5182 of 2020, whereby the learned
Single Judge fixed 11.03.2020 as next date and
further requiring the respondent authority to
consider objections of the petitioners and take a
decision by the said date and till such decision
is taken, the learned Single Judge provided that
the provisional list shall not operate. The said
order is reproduced below:
"Issue notice to the respondents, returnable on 11.03.2020. In the meantime, it is open for the respondents to consider the objection of the petitioners and take a decision thereon by the 11.03.2020. Till such a decision is taken, provisional list shall not operate. Direct service, today, is permitted".
(3.)Shri Oza, learned Senior Advocate has raised three grounds before us assailing the
correctness of the aforesaid order of the learned
Single Judge. Firstly, that the interim order
passed by the learned Single Judge is non?
speaking order. Secondly that the petition
suffers from the vice of non?joinder of necessary
parties, and therefore, the learned Single Judge
ought to have stayed his hands off and at the
first instance, the petitioners therein were
required to implead the affected parties as party
respondents in the writ petition and till such
time the affected parties were impleaded and
adequate opportunity given, no interim order
ought to have been passed. Thirdly that in
matters of seniority, interim order ought not to
have been passed and it is only at the stage of
final disposal, the decision could have been
taken about the merit of the seniority list. In
support of his submission, Shri Yatin Oza placed
reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this
Court dated 11.09.2015 passed in Letters Patent
Appeal No.1480 of 2013 between the Gujarat Public
Service Commission through the Secretary viz.
Parmar Nilesh Rajendrakumar and 99 others on the
proposition that in the absence of necessary
parties having been impleaded, the petition
itself was liable to be thrown out rather than
being entertained and interim order being passed.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.