SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Guj) 32

R.A.MEHTA, M.S.PARIKH
VALJIBHAI H. PATEL – Appellant
Versus
S. N. SUNDARAM – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: A.D.Padival

R. A. MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent arises out of special Civil Application No. 7300 of 1992 which was filed by the appellant who claimed to be a public spirited citizen interested in purity of administration of justice and a prayer was made that the order dated October 9, 1992 promoting respondent No. 7 from the post of Asstt. District Judge to the post of Joint District judge be quashed and set aside as being bad in law, illegal, arbitrary, suffering from the vice of favouritism, unconstitutional and in violation of Art. 233 read with Art. 216 and Art. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. A notice was issued on the petition to respondent No. 6, Registrar of High Court and affidavit-in-reply and further affidavits by the petitioner were filed. The petition was also amended by adding paras 6 (A), (B) and (C) and adding prayers (AA) and (CC ). Ultimately, the learned single Judge dismissed the petition on the ground that the petitioner had no locus standi.

( 2 ) AN objection has been taken to the constitution of this Special Bench for hearing of this Letters Patent Appeal, by filing an additional affidavit. Ordinarily, letters Patent Appeals are
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top