HARESHBHAI DESHABHAI BAGDA Vs. DHORAJI NAGARPALIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) . Rule. Service of rule waived by Mr. Premal R. Joshi, learned advocate for the respondents.

(2.) . The present petitions are filed for the relief that the respondent - Dhoraji Nagar Palika be restrained form terminating the services of the petitioners. The learned advocate for the respondents says that affidavits-in-reply have been filed in the Computer Centre, but the original affidavits are not available on the records of the petitions. Hence the learned advocate has supplied additional copies of the affidavits, which are taken on record. In the said affidavits common case is that one Special Civil Application No. 8138 of 2000 has been preferred before this Court wherein it is averred that the Municipality has not made appointments in accordance with law. It is also stated in the said affidavits that while issuing notice on the said Special Civil Application No. 8138 of 2000 this Court directed not to appoint any person except in accordance with law. In the present case a copy of the settlement is produced on record which is dated 6/12/1999, which is prior to the order passed by this Court in the aforesaid petition. It is interesting to note that affidavit proceeds further to state that, in the present case the petitioner was appointed in compliance of the settlement on the basis of which the award dated 13/6/2000 was passed, and the appointments were made in accordance with law.

(3.) . The affidavits proceed to state, "that as it is averred in Special Civil Application No. 8138 of 2000 that the Municipality has appointed the petitioners not in accordance with law and, therefore, with a view to avoid further complications only, the Municipality has cancelled the appointment orders of the petitioners". The affidavit in terms states that as such the appointments of the petitioners were in pursuance of the award and in accordance with law, but merely with a view to avoid the further complications the appointment orders were cancelled.