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

2006 Supreme(Guj) 669

RAVI R.TRIPATHI
KISHANKUMAR BALUBHAI GARSAR – Appellant
Versus
COLLECTOR, JAMNAGAR – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: KETAN D.SHAH, SUNIT SHAH

( 1 ) WITH the consent and at the request of the learned advocates, the matters are taken up for final disposal. Rule. Mr. Sunit Shah, learned Government Pleader waives service of rule.

( 2 ) THESE two petitions are filed by the petitioners being aggrieved by the non action on the part of the respondent authorities, namely, the Mamlatdar, who did not grant Caste Certificate to the petitioners. In Special Civil Application (SCA) No. 11734 of 2006 it is prayed that:

" (A) A writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order may kindly be issued by directing the respondent no. 2 to issue caste certificate in the name of the petitioner on the basis of the documents produced by the petitioner along with the application. "

Whereas, in SCA No. 12257 of 2006, it is prayed that:

"10 (A) A writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, direction or order may kindly be issued by directing the respondent no. 2 to issue caste certificate in the name of the petitioner on the basis of the documents produced by the petitioner along with the application. Application dated 18-8-2005 and the document produced in appeal no. 2/ 2006 as wel























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