IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 1811 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL ============================================================ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- MOHANBHAI P PARMAR Versus AHMEDABD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR VB GHARANIYA for Petitioner MR KIRIT PATEL for Respondents -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL Date of decision: 10/11/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT By means of filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondents to grant increments payable to him from the years 1984 to 1986. 2. The petitioner was appointed as a Motor Mazdoor in the year 1978 by the respondent - Corporation. He was made permanent on the post with effect from April 1, 1984 by an order dated October 17, 1986. The grievance made by the petitioner is that he is entitled to increments for the years from 1984 to 1986, but is not paid the same. Under the circumstances, the petitioner has filed present petition and claimed the relief to which reference is made earlier. 3. Mr. Kirit Patel, learned counsel for Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation has produced a letter dated October 18, 2000 addressed by the Assistant Manager, Solid Waste Management, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to the Legal Officer of the Corporation, wherein it is stated that the petitioner has been paid a sum of Rs.7632.39 ps. towards increments for the relevant period and the grievance made by the petitioner in the petition does not survive. This letter is addressed to the Legal Officer of the Corporation on the basis of letter addressed by the petitioner to the Assistant Manager, Solid Waste Management. A copy of the letter addressed by the petitioner to the Assistant Manager, Solid Waste Management of the Corporation is also produced before the Court. Those letters are ordered to be taken on record of the petition. In view of the contents of the letters, there is no manner of doubt that the grievance of the petitioner now does not survive and the petition has become infructuous. For the foregoing reasons, the petition fails. Rule is discharged, with no order as to costs. The petition is disposed of as having become infructuous. (J.M.Panchal,J.) (patel)