AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
10 paragraphs · 279 wordsHemant M. Prachchhak, J
Leave to correct the prayer clause 15(B).
Rule returnable forthwith. Mr.Nikunj Kanara, learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of respondent.
With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
Heard Mr. A.M. Parekh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nikunj Kanara, learned AGP for the respondents.
Mr.Parekh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Change Report No.70 of 2024 file on 19.3.2024 filed by the petitioner is pending before respondent No.2. He urges before the Court to direct the respondent No.2 to decide the said change report filed by the petitioner within reasonable time period.
On the other hand, Mr. Kanara, learned AGP for the respondents submits that if the Change report filed by the petitioner bearing Change Report No.70 of 2024 dated 19.03.2024 is pending before respondent No.2, then the same shall be decided, within time period fixed by this Court.
I have perused the record of the petition. It appears from the record that the Change Report No.70 of 2024 dated 19.03.2024 filed by the petitioner is not decided till today and is pending before respondent No.2 since long.
In view of the above, the respondent No.2 is hereby directed to decide the Change Report No.70 of 2024 dated 19.03.2024 filed by the petitioner preferably within period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of present order, in accordance with law.
With the above observations present petition stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.