IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8877 of 1992 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL ============================================================ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------- VIRCHANDJI C THAKORE Versus COLLECTOR OF AHMEDABAD CITY -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR ARUN H MEHTA for Petitioner MR LR POOJARI, AGP. for Respondent Nos. 1, 2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE M.C.PATEL Date of decision: 27/04/2000 ORAL JUDGEMENT This petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order No.CB-LND-K-3403 dated 26.11.1992 passed by the Collector, District Ahmedabad which was sent to the petitioner on 30.11.1992. The said order was passed against seven persons including the petitioner. One Govaji Bapuji was also one of them. He filed a revision application before the Government against the same order. The learned Assistant Government Pleader produces a copy of the order dated 12.1.1994 passed by the Secretary, Revenue (Appeals) which shows that the revision application was partly allowed and the order of the Collector dated 26.11.1992 and the subsequent order of the City Deputy Collector dated 15.12.1992 were set aside and the matter was remanded to City Assistant Collector for him to decide the matter in accordance with the directions given by this Court in SCA No.3535/91. Thus, the order of the Collector which has been challenged in this petition has already been set aside by the Secretary, Revenue (Appeals) at the instance of another person who was affected by the same order. Hence the present petition does not survive and has become infructuous. The petition is therefore disposed of accordingly. Rule discharged. No order as to costs. --- m.m.bhatt