( 1 ) HEARD learned Advocate Mrs. Shilpa J. Unwalla appearing for the petitioner and Mrs. B. R. Gajjar, learned A. P. P. appearing for respondent No. 1-State. Respondent No. 2 served.

( 2 ) THAT being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the order passed by learned Special judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, dated 15-9-1997, below Exhibits 11 and 89, in Special Case No. 14 of 1993, the petitioner has filed the present Revision application. That vide impugned order, the learned Special Judge has dismissed both the Applications - Exhibit 11 as well as Exhibit 89 moved by present petitioner as accused No. 2 of Special Case No. 14 of 1993.

( 3 ) THAT the present petitioner was appointed as Director of Nehru Yuva Kendra sangathan, Western Zone, an institute established by Ministry of Human Resources and Development, Government of India. That under the said Sangathan, there were various Nehru Yuva Kendras, working as units for youth activities convened by youth Coordinators. One Mr. R. R. Joshiara was one of the Youth Coordinators of the unit working under Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan. That on 27-5-1993, C. B. I. submitted a charge-sheet in the Court of Special Judge at Ahmedabad against present petitioner and said R. R. Joshiara for having committed offence made punishable under S. 409, 109 of the I. P. C. and also under S. 13 (1) (d) read with S. 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. That the said charge-sheet was registered as Special Case No. 14 of 1993 in the City Sessions Court at Ahmedabad. That as per the allegations made in the charge-sheet, it was alleged that an advance amount of Rs. 38,000. 00 was misappropriated during the tenure of said Shri R. R. Joshiara as Youth Coordinator. That at the relevant time, present petitioner though posted as Director of Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathan, had no power or authority to control the Youth Coordinators or funding of Nehru Yuva Kendra Sangathans.

( 4 ) THAT present petitioner moved an Application Exhibit 11 before the Special judge and claimed to be discharged from the offence alleged against him in the charge-sheet by C. B. I. on the ground that material produced with the charge-sheet did not disclose and prima facie case against the present petitioner as alleged. That such application was heard in the years 1993 and 1994, but had remained pending for order. It is contended by the petitioner that thereafter the petitioner moved another application on 13-3-1997 - Exhibit 89 contending that complaint filed against petitioner is not maintainable for want of requisite sanction as prescribed under S. 197 of the Cr. P. C. That the learned Special Judge, City Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, disposed of abovestated both the Applications, i. e. , Exhibit 11 as well as Exhibit 89 by Common Order dated 15th September 1997 and rejected both the applications, and as such, the petitioner has challenged the same in the present petition.

( 5 ) ). Mrs. Shilpa J. Unwalla, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has taken me through the impugned order produced on record vide running page 1 to 8 and has urged that though the learned Special Judge has mentioned Application exhibit 11 in the title and operative part of the order, learned Judge has neither discussed the contents of Application - Exhibit 11 nor has given any reasons for rejection of such application. That there is no mention about the subject-matter of application Exhibit 11 in the entire order, and as such, the impugned order suffers with serious infirmities and the order deserves to be set aside and quashed.

( 6 ) IT is further submitted that vide letter dated 13th September, 1995, the Deputy secretary to the Government of India - Mr. Gautam Guha has addressed a communication to Superintendent of Police, C. B. I. , Ashram Road, Ahmedabad, as per copy produced by Annexure D on running page 9 of the compilation. That through said communication, Deputy Secretary to the Government of India has brought to the notice o