IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 4232 of 1991 with SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 4877 of 1991 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO 4910 of 1991 And SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4929 OF 1991 To SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4960 OF 1991 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE N.G.NANDI ============================================================ 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? -------------------------------------------------------------- P S PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 4232 of 1991 MRS KETTY A MEHTA for Petitioner No. 1 .......... for Petitioner No. 2-67 MR. A.D. OZA,GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent No. 1-2 M/S TRIVEDI & GUPTA for Respondent No. 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.G.NANDI Date of decision: 03/07/2003 COMMON ORAL JUDGEMENT 1. Mr. A.D. Oza, Learned Government Pleader has placed on record the original letter dated 2-7-2003 issued by the Director, Agriculture Department, Gujarat State, Ahmedabad, in respect of the written instructions furnished by the respondent State to the Learned Government Pleader. Letter dated 2-7-2003 suggests that the challenge in the petition will not survive in as much as the petitioners have already been accommodated in the department and also paid their salaries as prayed in the petition. The letter further suggests that none of the grievances of the petitioners now survive. 2. In view of the letter dated 2-7-2003 placed on record by Learned Government Pleader, the grievances in the petitions do not survive and the demands in the petitions have been met by the respondent State. 3. It is stated by Ms. K.A. Mehta, learned advocate for the petitioners that, in view of the contents of the letter dated 2-7-2003 the petitions do not survive and the same be permitted to be withdrawn. 4. Petitions dismissed as withdrawn. Rule discharged. Interim relief, if any, granted earlier stands vacated. No costs. Office to place copy of this order in each of the petitions. Dt: 3-7-2003 ( N.G. Nandi, J ) /vgn