RAMESHBHAI V PARIKH Vs. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admitted. Mr. Ketan Dave learned counsel waives service of notice on behalf of respondent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against an order passed by the learned single Judge summarily dismissing Special Civil Application No. 2316 of 1997 on March 26, 1997. By that order, the learned single Judge rejected the petition filed by the petitioner on the ground that alternative remedy is available to the petitioner and since it has not been availed of the High Court would not interfere under Art. 226 of the Constitution.

(3.) We have heard Mr. P.K. Jani learned counsel for the appellant. He submitted that the order passed by the learned single Judge is contrary to law. He also submitted that the action taken by the authorities is unlawful and the same requires interference by this court. He mainly raised three contentions.