SUDHANSU S PATEL Vs. GSRTC THRO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IT was submitted by learned counsel, Mr. Asim Pandya, appearing for the appellant, who is a practicing advocate of this Court, that remarks in oral order dated 7-9-2006 in Special Civil Application No. 19113 of 2006 were made without the appellant being a party and without his having an opportunity of being heard. It was submitted that, in the peculiar facts and circumstances, the appellant had had to return the papers to the original petitioner and no delay or blame could be attributed to learned counsel from whom papers were withdrawn and the petition had come to be filed through another learned counsel. It was fairly conceded on behalf of the respondent by learned counsel, Ms. Jyoti Mehta, that remarks in question were uncalled for and unjustified in view of the fact that the present appellant had appeared to have acted bona fide and without negligence on his own part.

(2.) IT was seen that the remarks in question were made against the appellant without his having an opportunity of being heard, and if all the facts and say of the appellant were put before learned Single Judge, perhaps the remarks might not have been made. Therefore, it would be appropriate for the appellant to approach learned Single Judge with appropriate application for reviewing the aforesaid order and removing remarks made personally against him. We are sure that the appellant would get a fair hearing and proper justice at the hands of learned Single Judge, and we, on our part, would request learned Single Judge to examine the matter on its own merits without any technical things coming in the way of learned counsel getting a sympathetic hearing and consideration of his request. The respondent having no objection to this course of action and having agreed to have proposed application of the appellant being heard on merits, the appellant shall not be required to file any application for condonation of delay, if any, in filing appropriate application, and as and when such application is made it shall be placed by the office before learned Single Judge for consideration, subject to there being no other office objection.

(3.) IN view of above observations, the appeal is not pressed for any further reliefs, and accordingly, it is disposed and Civil Application is also disposed as not surviving.