IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 510 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 520 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 521 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 522 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 523 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 524 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 525 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 536 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 529 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 530 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 513 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 514 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 515 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 516 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 517 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 518 of 1998 with LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 519 of 1998 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.J.SHETHNA and HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL ============================================================ 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 concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- JAYVANTSINH S GOHIL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 510 of 1998 MR SP BUNDELA for MR HARIN P RAVAL for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondents No 2-4 2. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 520 of 1998 MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 2 MR RJ OZA for Respondent No. 3 3. LETTERS PATENT APPEALS No 514, 515, 516, 517, 519, 521, 529 and 530 of 1998 MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondents No. 2-3 4. LETTERS PATENT APPEALS No. 513, 518, 522 and 524 of 1998 MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 2 MS TEJAL SUTHARIA for MR VH DESAI for Respondent No.3 5. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 523 of 1998 MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondent No. 2 MR RR MARSHALL for Respondent No. 3 6. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 525 of 1998 MR TUSHAR MEHTA for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 RULE SERVED for Respondents No. 2-4 MS TEJAL SUTHARIA for MR VH DESAI for Respondent No.5 7. LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No 536 of 1998 MR YOGESH S LAKHANI for Appellant MR SN SHELAT, ADVOCATE GENERAL with MR PR ABICHANDANI, AGP for Respondent No. 1 MR RJ OZA for Respondent No. 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.J.SHETHNA and HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL Date of decision: 25/06/2004 ORAL COMMON JUDGEMENT (Per : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE B.J.SHETHNA) In all these matters, learned Advocate General Shri S.N. Shelat appears with Shri P.R. Abichandani, learned AGP for the respondent Government. The learned Advocate General states that tenure of the appellants is already over. Therefore, by the subsequent events taking place in the matter, all these appeals have become infructuous. When these matters were called out, only learned counsel Shri Bundela for Shri Harin Raval for the appellant was present. He has also stated at the bar that by now his appeal has become infructuous. If it is so, then all the other appeals also require to be dismissed as having become infructuous and accordingly, they are dismissed as having become infructuous. ( B.J. Shethna, J. ) ( M.C. Patel, J. ) hki