PARSOTTAMBHAI CHHAGANBHAI MANDAVIYA Vs. AMRELI NAGAR PALIKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Joshi, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Sanchela, learned advocate for the respondent Nagarpalika.

(2.) In present petition, the petitioner has prayed, inter alia, that:

(3.) The grievance raised in this petition is on the premise that the petitioner was prematurely retired (on superannuation) i.e. before he actually attained age of superannuation. The petitioner's said claim and contention is opposed by the Nagarpalika on merits as well as on the premise that the petitioner raised the said dispute after gross delay and long time after he was actually relieved from service (on ground of superannuation) and that, therefore, the petitioner's claim does deserve to be entertained and should be rejected. Besides the said contention, the petitioner's claim is opposed by the Nagarpalika also on the ground that before the Nagarpalika actually relieved the petitioner on ground of superannuation, opportunity was given to the petitioner to submit relevant, authentic and reliable documents to establish the date of birth and to establish that he has, actually, attained age of superannuation, however, the petitioner did avail opportunity and failed to submit any document to support his claim that he has reached age of superannuation and that after granting such opportunity Nagarpalika relieved the petitioner and that, therefore also, the claim does deserve to be entertained.