SCA/10072/2008 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10072 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= HARDABHAI VASTABHAI BOSIR - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS SJ SHEIKH for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR JK SHAH, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 06/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Learned AGP, Shri J.K.Shah, waives service of rule on behalf of respondent-State. SCA/10072/2008 2/3 JUDGMENT 2. By the impugned order dated 11.7.2008, the Secretary (Appeals) Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat was pleased to refuse interim relief prayed for by the petitioner pending his revision application. 3. Learned advocate for the petitioner drew my attention to the said order; wherein, it is recorded that on 18th June, 2008, application for adjournment was filed on behalf of the petitioner, dispite which, the impugned order came to be passed. 4. It is true that there were earlier adjournments in the proceedings and it is also true that under the order of the High Court, the application for interim relief was required to be taken up urgently, therefore, the petitioner was not justified in indefinitely asking for adjournments. Under the circumstances, it was open for the Secretary to reject the application for adjournment and thereafter, proceed to hear the application and pass appropriate order in accordance with law. 5. In the present case, from the record it appears that, however, such application does not seem to have been rejected before proceeding to pass the impugned order. Under the circumstances, in the larger interest of the justice and to enable the petitioner to put forth his case, impugned order is set aside. The Revenue Secretary shall pass fresh order after hearing the petitioner or his representative for the above purpose. Tentative date of 13th August, 2008 is fixed as was done in Special Civil Application No.9984 of 2008 and connected matters by an order dated 4.8.2008. If it is not convenient for the SCA/10072/2008 3/3 JUDGMENT Officer to take up the matter on that day, it would be open for her to fix another date. The petitioner shall not insist on communication of the date of hearing on 13.8.2008 and shall not seek time. 6. With these directions, the petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted. (AKIL KURESHI, J.) ashish//