IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 2684 of 1988 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH ============================================================ 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? : -------------------------------------------------------------- USHA K CHOKSHI Versus DIRECTOR INDIAN STANDARDS INSTITUTION -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR DM THAKKAR for Petitioner MR JS YADAV for Respondent No. 1, 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH Date of decision: 10/03/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT In this petition filed in the year 1988, the petitioner a stenographer in the Indian Standards Institution had challenged the action of the respondents in giving her breaks in service and in not granting her permanent status and benefits flowing from the same. When the matter is called out for final hearing today, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the respondents state that the petitioner had already given up her job in the Indian Standards Institution about 7 years ago and has taken up employment elsewhere. Both the learned counsel therefore agree that the petition has become infructuous. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as having become infructuous. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. 2 While this matter is disposed of today, Mr J.S.Jadav appearing for Indian Standards Institution states that this petition was required to be heard with Special Civil Applications Nos.1839 of 1987 and 5055 of 1987 which are also filed against the same institution. He further states that the aforesaid petitions are required to be placed on the Board for final hearing. Office shall look into the matter and if these matters are not already notified, shall notify these matters for final hearing. *** (mohd)