SCA/2374/1999 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2374 of 1999 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2375 of 1999 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2376 of 1999 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2378 of 1999 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2380 of 1999 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 2381 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= HALPATI SEVA SANGH - Petitioner(s) Versus DIRECTOR & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR RN SHAH for Petitioner(s) : 1, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for Respondent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 15/04/2008 SCA/2374/1999 2/4 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT 1. In all the petitions the prayers of the petitioner, who is running different schools is that grant be released by the Government. 2. Heard Mr. Shah learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Shukla learned AGP for the State Authority. 3. Upon hearing learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, it appears from the affidavit in reply filed that pending the petition, the grant have been released in respect of such certain Ashramshala, which are subject matter of the present petitions. So far as the remaining amount is concerned, in SCA No. 2381 of 1999, the affidavit in reply has been filed by the officer of the Ashramshala wherein at para 5 it has been stated inter alia that if the petitioner institution produces the audited account of the year in which the grant is not paid, they may be paid the remaining amount of grant accordingly. It is also stated that the amount can be paid only after the audited SCA/2374/1999 3/4 JUDGMENT accounts have been produced and unless and until the audited accounts are produced, the grant cannot be released. 4. In view of the above stand taken on behalf of the respondent authority, Mr. Shah learned Counsel for the petitioner states that petitioner shall make different representation in each case together with the audited books of accounts, if the grant is not actually released for that particular period. Therefore, he submitted that the authority may be directed to release the grant within some reasonable time. 5. Whereas on behalf of the respondent authority it has been submitted by Mr. Shukla learned AGP that if the representation is made, the same shall be considered in light of the affidavit filed on behalf of the State Government and its officers. 6. Under these circumstances, if the petitioner makes representation together with the audited books of account within three weeks from today, the same shall be examined by the concerned authority and if there is no dispute on the SCA/2374/1999 4/4 JUDGMENT audited books of account and the audited report is produced with the authenticated material, matter shall be examined in light of the stand taken in the affidavit in reply and the appropriate decision including disbursement, if any, shall be taken preferably within a period of four months from the receipt of the representation. 7. All the petitions are disposed of. Rule partly made absolute. No order as to cost. (JAYANT PATEL, J.) Suresh*