IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 2434 of 1984 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 Civil Judge? : NO @ PRANSHANKAR P PANDYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 2434 of 1984 NOTICE SERVED for Petitioner No. 1 Mr.L.R.Pujari, Ld.AGP for Respondent No. 1-2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE N.G.NANDI Date of decision: 13/07/2001 ORAL JUDGEMENT None present for the petitioner. In this petition the petitioner has been praying for quashing the notification dated 7.4.1994-annexure "B" issued by the Panchayat Department of the respondents and also praying for issuance of order of promtoion and posting of persons shown at Sl.Nos 12 to 26 in the said notification. 2. In the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondents it has been stated that Special Civil Application Nos 2109 and 2258/84 were filed by some other persons involving identical issue and that Special Civil Application No.2109/84 was dismissed by this court. It is stated by Mr.Pujari, Ld.AGP that he is not aware whether any Letters Patent Appeal is filed against the order dismissing Special Civil Application No.2109/84. 3. In para 9 of the affidavit in reply it has been stated that the petitioner was promoted on 6.6.1984. 4. The petitioner having been promoted on 6.6.1984 having regard to the prayer in writ petition none of the reliefs claimed in the petition survive and therefore the petition is liable to be dismissed as infructuous. 5. In view of the above, the petition is dismissed as infructuous. Rule is discharged. No costs. 13.7.2001 (N.G.NANDI,J)