IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 6977 of 1990 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE R.R.TRIPATHI ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : YES to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : YES 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- VIJYA MEGHJI JUNGI Versus CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FISHERIES TECHNOLOGY(I.C.A.R.) -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR AJ SHASTRI for Petitioner MS PJ DAVAWALA for Respondent No. 1 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE R.R.TRIPATHI Date of decision: 29/09/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT : Learned advocate, Ms.P.J. Davawala appearing for respondent no.1 submitted that an affidavit in reply dated 26.3.1992 was filed in this matter along with annexures. On perusal of the papers, it is not traceable on record. Ms.Davawala tendered a copy of the said affidavit in reply, which is taken on record. She pointed out a Notification dated 20.4.1987, which is produced as Annexure 'I' with the affidavit in reply. In exercise of powers conferred under subsection 2 of sec.14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 ("the Act" for brevity) the Central Government specified 15.5.1987 as the date on and from which the provisions of subsection (3) of section 14 of the Act will be applicable to the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, being a society owned or controlled by the Government. 2. In that view, the present petition is not maintainable. The petitioner may avail of the remedy of approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal. The petition is disposed of. Rule is discharged with no order as to cost. 3. This Court has not examined any of the aspect of the case on merits. It will be open to petitioner to approach and ventilate his grievances before the Central Administrative Tribunal. 29th September 2000 (Ravi R. Tripathi, J.) karim*