PATEL SURESHKUMAR PRAHLADBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE matter is notified at serial No.33 for final hearing. Learned advocate Ms.Pooja K.Dave requested for priority in the matter for final hearing. Request was granted.

(2.) HEARD learned advocate Ms.Dave for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr.Nitin Dave for Mr.Pranav Shah for respondent No.2.

(3.) LEARNED advocate Ms.Dave could not dislodge the aforesaid submission and had to accept that in paragraph 4 of the judgment and order dated 2.2.2010 the Court has recorded that, ....... and has submitted that the order impugned in this petition is just and proper and the petitioner is not entitled to any relief as prayed for in the petition and the same is required to be dismissed. (emphasis supplied). LEARNED advocate for the petitioner had to accept that the petitioner has not annexed any order. The learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner averred in paragraph 5 of the petition as under. The petitioner further submits that as these all documents are formally verified, the petitioner has to face utmost trouble with regard to the said differences in the documents and therefore, the petitioner begs to prefer present petition before this Honourable Court. The petitioner further states and submits that the said difference may cause the difficulty for the petitioner in future in his academic year, or service career or his domestic career also. It is submitted that the said mistake has occurred due to bonafide (sic. mistake)of the father of the petitioner and there is no fault on their part to commit this mistake deliberately or knowingly. It is further submitted that because of the aforesaid genuine mistake, the petitioner has become sufferer and he has to suffer a lot without any fault on his part and in future also, there is a chance, which may cause great difficulty for the petitioner; hence the petitioner is constraint to approach this Honourable Court by way of preferring the present petition. (emphasis supplied).