IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 4046 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.R.CALLA ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : NO to see the judgement? 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- SHANTABEN KANJIBHAI DESAI, SARPANCH Versus JD JOSHI OR SUCCESSOR -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR KC PATEL for MR BG JANI for Petitioner MR PK SHUKLA, ld.AGP for Respondent No.1 MR BAROT for MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondents Nos.2 & 3 MR HR PRAJAPATI for Respondents Nos.4 to 13 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.R.CALLA Date of decision: 30/03/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT Msr.K.C.Patel for Mr.B.G.Jani has submitted that the office of Mr.Jani had duly informed the petitioner way back on 20th November 1999 that he seeks to retire from this brief. A copy of this letter dated 20th November 1999 has been produced along with the postal certificate dated 23rd November 1999. The letter dated 20th November 1999 and the postal certificate dated 23rd November 1999 shall remain on record. 2. The submission made by Mr.P.K.Shukla, ld. Asstt. Govt. Pleader appearing for respondent no.1 that the petition has become infructuous is supported by learned Counsel Mr.Barot for Mr.H.S.Munshaw appearing for respondents nos.2 and 3, as also by Mr.H.R.Prajapati for respondents nos.4 to 13. Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader has pointed out that the Notification under challenge stands already implemented and that the election of the Panchayat are going to be held on the basis of the aforesaid Notification. There is no one to controvert this submission made by learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader. It also appears that the petitioner has lost interest in the case. 3. This Special Civil Application is, therefore, dismissed as having become infructuous. The Rule is hereby discharged. No order as to costs. (M.R. Calla, J.) ****** Sreeram.