YUSUF JAMAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.Adityasinh Jadeja, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

(2.) Though served, no one has chosen to appear for and on behalf of the respondent No.2, who has passed the impugned order.

(3.) At the outset, learned advocate for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order dtd. 11/12/2019 is passed without hearing the petitioner and is premised on the incorrect facts. He has submitted that by email dtd. 9/12/2019, the petitioner was informed by the respondent-authority that hearing of his complaint has been scheduled on 17 th December, 2019 from 12:00 to 12:30 p.m. However, before 17 th December, 2019, the impugned order rejecting the complaint of the petitioner has been passed on 11/12/2019 by observing that the petitioner- original complainant has remained absent.