SCA/10268/1995 1/2 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10268 of 1995 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 ? ========================================================= US PARMAR - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS SADHANA SAGAR for Petitioner(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 04/05/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT 1.Though called out twice, learned advocate for the petitioner was absent. Even other-wise, the prayer made in the petition are as follows : SCA/10268/1995 2/2 JUDGMENT (A) pending admission and till the final disposal of this writ petition, this Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or directions or orders that may deem fit and proper to the Hon'ble Court in favour of the petitioner. (B) Pending the admission and till the final disposal of this writ petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus restraining the respondent office from implementing the office order NO. YSP/MKM/SAG/BN/95/K/2 dtd: 31/7/1995 (Annexure-'A') with immediate effect. (C) Any other order/directions that may deem fit, just and proper to the Hon'ble Court may pleased be passed in the favour of the petitioner. (D) Cost of this writ petition may please be granted to the petitioner from the respondent.” 2.Upon perusal of the said prayer, it can be seen that the petitioner has not made any substantive prayer. All the prayers are in the nature of interim prayers. In the present form therefore, the petition is not maintainable. The petition is therefore, rejected. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. (Akil Kureshi,J.) (raghu)