VINAYCHANDRA NATWARLAL GANGADIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application, the applicant has challenged the judgment and order dated 30.11.2019 passed by learned Special Judge (ACB), Bhavnagar in Special (ACB) Case No.5 of 2015.

(2.) Heard learned advocate for the applicant and learned APP for the respondent-State.

(3.) It is submitted by learned advocate for the applicant that impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Special Judge convicting present applicant is contrary to the facts and evidence on record. There is complete absence of ingredients like demand and recovery of illegal gratification as alleged by the prosecution case. It is further submitted that issue of sanction by Competent Authority was challenged by present applicant before this Court in earlier proceedings, and this Court was pleased to keep open to the applicant to raise the dispute at the time of final hearing. That, findings of the learned Special Judge that Appointing Authority is District Development Officer itself is incorrect as and this fact is admitted by this witness himself. That, process of recruitment is made by Panchayat Service Selection Committee. That, without granting prior approval, the applicant cannot be removed from the service or cannot be appointed by the District Development Officer. That, the findings arrived at by the learned Special Judge is contrary to the evidence on record. In support of his submissions, learned advocate for the applicant has relied upon the judgment in the case of Gopalbhai Mohanbhai Nagoda Vs. State reported in 1993(2) GLR 1238 as well as in the case of Krishna Kumar Vs. the Divisinoal Assistant Electrical Engineer, Central Railway and others reported in 1979 (4) SCC 289.