IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 3237 of 1989 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- GUJ SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPN KARMCAHRI UNION Versus GUJ SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPN -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR AK CLERK for Petitioners MR PV HATHI for Respondent No. 1 NOTICE SERVED for Respondent No. 2 MS MANISHA L. SHAH, AGP for Respondent no.3. MR JR NANAVATI for Respondent No. 4 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE J.M.PANCHAL Date of decision: 24/03/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT By means of filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, Gujarat Small Industries Corporation Karmchari Union and others have challenged order dated February 22, 1989, by which respondent no.4 came to be promoted to the post of Junior Executive. Mr. P.V.Hathi, learned Counsel for Gujarat Small Industries Corporation states at the Bar that pursuant to introduction of Voluntary Retirement Scheme, most of the employees of the Corporation including the office bearers of the petitioner-Association as well as respondent no.4 have opted for voluntary retirement. In view of this, learned Counsel for the petitioners states that the petition has become infructuous and may be disposed of accordingly. As the respondent no.4 has voluntarily retired from service, I am of the opinion that the stand taken by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the petition has become infructuous and should be disposed of, deserves to be accepted. For the foregoing reasons, the petition fails and is dismissed. Rule is discharged, with no order as to costs. The petition stands disposed of as having become infructuous. Ad-interim relief granted earlier is hereby vacated. ******* 24.3.2000 (J.M.Panchal,J.) (patel)