IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 12241 of 2000 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE D.C.SRIVASTAVA ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? : NO -------------------------------------------------------------- TANVIRUDDIN ILMUDDIN SHAIKH Versus ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR MM TIRMIZI for Petitioner MR AD OZA for Respondent No. 1 MR RC KODEKAR, AGP for Respondent No. 2, 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE D.C.SRIVASTAVA Date of decision: 14/02/2001 ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. Heard Shri MM Tirmizi, learned counsel for the petitioner on admission of this petition. Notice has been served on the respondent, who is represented by Shri AD Oza, but he is not present even in the second round. Shri RC Kodekar, learned AGP represents respondent nos.2 and 3. He requests for time to file counter affidavit. Sufficient time was granted. Moreover, Shri Tirmizi presses only relief-19(A) of the writ petition. In view of this stand, no counter affidavit is required from the respondent nos.2 and 3. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in para-19(A) of the petition is that, the respondents be directed to decide the application of the petitioner for inter-district transfer sent by him on 28-3-1989, as well as, subsequent reminder application dated 28-3-1995 within a period of four weeks. It is really surprising that such application remained pending since 1989 despite reminder dated 28-3-1995. 3. As such, the petition is finally disposed of with direction to the respondent no.1 to decide the representation dated 28-3-1989 and 28-3-1995, submitted by the petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The order of the respondent no.1 shall be speaking order in writing, which shall be communicated to the petitioner through registered AD post. Direct service is permitted. February 14, 2001. [ D.C. Srivastava, J.] /sakkaf