Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Hiteshbhai Chandubhai Gami, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order dated 19.02.2021 passed by respondent authorities. The impugned order had withdrawn certain service benefits from the petitioner, who sought a writ of mandamus to quash the order and direct the respondents to treat his service as continuous from his original date of appointment without breaks. During the pendency of the petition, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Ahmedabad, issued a communication dated 10.03.2023 recalling the benefits that had been withdrawn pursuant to the impugned order. The learned Assistant Government Pleader, Ms. Forum Bimal Sukhadwala, submitted that nothing survived in the matter. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, Mr. G. M. Joshi, argued that the issue was covered by several judgments, including a Division Bench judgment dated 15.07.2024 in Letters Patent Appeal No.129 of 2024. However, the court, after taking the communication on record, held that the petition had become infructuous and disposed it of without entering into the merits. The court did not award costs.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Article 226 of the Constitution of India - Mandamus - The petitioner sought quashing of an order withdrawing service benefits and direction for continuity of service. During pendency, the respondent authority recalled the impugned order via communication dated 10.03.2023, rendering the matter infructuous. The court disposed of the petition as not surviving. (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned order dated 19.02.2021 withdrawing service benefits of the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal, and whether the petitioner is entitled to continuity of service from original date of appointment.
Final Decision
The court disposed of the petition as having become infructuous in view of the communication dated 10.03.2023 recalling the benefits. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ of mandamus
- Article 226 of the Constitution of India
- Service law
- Continuity of service
- Withdrawal of benefits
- Recall of order
- Matter rendered infructuous
Case Details
2026 LawText (GUJ) (03) 988
R/Special Civil Application No. 4552 of 2021
G M Joshi (Senior Counsel) with Vyom H Shah for Petitioner, Forum Bimal Sukhadwala (AGP) for Respondent-State
Hiteshbhai Chandubhai Gami
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order withdrawing service benefits.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of order dated 19.02.2021 and direction to treat service as continuous from original date of appointment.
Filing Reason
The respondent authorities passed an order dated 19.02.2021 withdrawing service benefits of the petitioner.
Previous Decisions
During pendency, the respondent issued communication dated 10.03.2023 recalling the withdrawn benefits.
Issues
Whether the impugned order dated 19.02.2021 is arbitrary and illegal.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to continuity of service from original date of appointment.
Submissions/Arguments
Respondent-State submitted that vide communication dated 10.03.2023, the benefits withdrawn were recalled, rendering the matter infructuous.
Petitioner argued that the issue is covered by several judgments including a Division Bench judgment dated 15.07.2024 in LPA No.129/2024.
Ratio Decidendi
When the impugned order is recalled by the authority during pendency of the writ petition, the petition becomes infructuous and is liable to be disposed of without adjudicating on merits.
Judgment Excerpts
At the outset, Ms. Sukhadwala, learned AGP, would state that during the pendency of this petition, vide communication dated 10.03.2023, issued by the Office of the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Ahmedabad, to the petitioner, whereby, the benefits, which have been withdrawn pursuant to the impugned order dated 19.02.2021, are recalled.
Per contra, Mr. G. M. Joshi, learned Senior Counsel, would state that the issue germane in the matter is as such squarely covered by several judgments of this Court, including the recent one of the Division Bench of this Court, vide its judgment dated 15.07.2024 passed in Letters Patent Appeal No.129 of 2024 in Special Civil Application No. 3813 of 2021.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Special Civil Application No. 4552 of 2021 before the Gujarat High Court challenging order dated 19.02.2021. During pendency, on 10.03.2023, the respondent authority recalled the impugned order. The court heard the matter on 17.03.2026 and disposed it as infructuous.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
