VARSHABEN PRAKASHBHAI HAKANI vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10541 of 2026
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✓
==========================================================
VARSHABEN PRAKASHBHAI HAKANI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
RUSHABH H MUNSHAW(8958) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
HENIL SHAH AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 01/09/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rushabh Munshaw for the
petitioner, learned AGP Mr. Henil Shah for respondent Nos. 1
and 2, and learned Central Government Standing Counsel Mr.
P. D. Bhate for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
2. With the consent of the parties, the matter was taken up
for final hearing. Hence, Rule. Learned AGP Mr. Henil Shah
and learned Central Government Standing Counsel Mr. P. D.
Page 1 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
Bhate waive service of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1
and 2 and respondent Nos. 3 and 4, respectively.
3. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for
quashing and setting aside the order dated 18.06.2026 passed
by respondent No. 2, i.e. the Resident Additional Collector,
Surat, whereby the petitioner’s MPKBY Agency No.
133/SUR/MPKBY/2002 has been cancelled.
4. The brief facts, as stated by learned advocate Mr.
Munshaw, are as under:
4.1. The petitioner was duly appointed as a Mahila Pradhan
Kshetriya Bachat Yojana Agent (MPKBY Agent) on 28.01.2002
by the competent authority. Since the date of her appointment,
the petitioner has been discharging her duties with utmost
honesty, integrity, and diligence and has, by now, rendered
services as an MPKBY Agent for about 24 years.
4.2. According to the petitioner, there has been no complaint
against her work as an agent throughout her career. The
petitioner is a 67-year-old widow. Though the petitioner has a
Page 2 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
son, he is not engaged in any employment or occupation, and
it is the petitioner who is shouldering the responsibility of
maintaining the household and earning a bread for the family.
4.3. It is in the aforesaid background that the petitioner was
carrying on the agency under the MPKBY Scheme and was
serving more than 400 investors/depositors. On 16.04.2026,
respondent No. 4 conducted an inspection at the Katargam Post
Office. At that time, according to the petitioner, her son had
also visited the Katargam Post Office in connection with his
personal work. However, the respondent No. 4 alleged that the
petitioner’s son misbehaved with the respondent No. 4,
resulting in a verbal altercation between them. Consequently,
the petitioner was issued a show-cause notice by respondent
No. 1 on 06.05.2026, proposing termination of her agency.
After the petitioner submitted her reply to the said show-cause
notice, respondent No. 2, vide order dated 18.06.2026,
terminated the petitioner’s agency.
5. The matter was mainly argued by learned advocate Mr.
Munshaw on humanitarian grounds, submitting that the
petitioner is a 67-year-old widow and that her son is not
engaged in any employment or occupation. It was submitted
Page 3 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
that the petitioner is solely responsible for maintaining the
household. Learned advocate Mr. Munshaw further submitted
that, though there are allegations that the petitioner’s son had
misbehaved with the post office staff and had attempted to
dictate terms, the petitioner cannot be held responsible for the
conduct of her son. The petitioner has also filed an affidavit,
along with an affidavit of her son. Both the affidavits filed by
the petitioner and her son are reproduced hereinbelow;
“AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER
I. Varshaben Prakashbhai Hakani, Sex: Female, Age: 67
years, having address at: 502, Arpan Tower, Opp. Fire
Brigade, Katargam, Surat, do hereby state on solemn
affirmation and file the present affidavit on oath as
under:
1.) The deponent most respectfully submits that, she is
awarded agency by Collector & District Magistrate, Surat
under a scheme Mahila Pradhan Kshetriya Bachat Yojna
(MPKBY) on 28.01.2002, and since then she is handling
the agency on her own but due to advancing age and
introduction of computer system in postal department she
has been taking help of her son Mr. Mehul P. Hakani
occasionally for last few years.
2.) The deponent submits that, however the agency is
terminated by the Collector and District Magistrate, Surat
Page 4 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
through order dated 18.06.2026 owing to the complaint
addressed by Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Surat
Division, Surat against Mr. Mehul P. Hakani.
3.) The deponent most respectfully submits that she has
lost her husband Mr. Prakashbhai Hakani on 29.12.2006
and this is the only source of income for her and
therefore Hon'ble Court is most respectfully requested to
consider her case sympathetically. The deponent submits
that, from now onwards she will not allow her son Mr.
Mehul Prakashbhai Hakani to enter the Post office at
Kartargam, Surat to help or assist her for any agency
related work. I undertake and assure that he will not
help or assist me in my work and I will seek assistance
or help from my daughter in law Mrs. Dhara Mehul
Hakani or any other messenger. The deponent craves
leave to annex herewith an affidavit dated 14.08.2026 of
her son Mehul Prakashbhai Hakani declaring that he
would not deal with the work with her agency and enter
the premises of Katargam Post Office, Surat in that
regard. Annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-I is
a copy of the affidavit dated 18.08.2026 of Mr.
Mehulkumar Prakashbhai Hakani.
th
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad, on this 18 day
of August, 2026.
sd/-
DEPONENT
Page 5 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF MR. OF MEHUL AFFIDAVIT
PRAKASHBHAI HAKANI
I, Mehul Prakashbhai Hakani, Sex: male, Age: 35 years,
having address at: 502, Arpan Tower, Opp. Fire Brigade,
Katargam, Surat, do hereby state on solemn affirmation
and file the present affidavit on oath as under:
1.) I hereby undertake and assure the Hon'ble Court that
now onwards I will not enter into premises of the Post
Office at Katargam, Surat to deal with any of the work
of my mother Varshaben Prakashbhai Hakani relating to
her agency under the scheme known as Mahila Pradhan
Kshetriya Bachat Yojna (MPKBY) awarded by the
Collector and District Magistrate, Surat on 28.01.2022.
2.) I tender unconditional apology for my conduct and
humbly pray that the Hon'ble Court be kind enough to
pass appropriate orders in favour of the petitioner for
continuation of her agency in the interest of justice.
th
Solemnly affirmed at Ahmedabad, on this 18 day
of August, 2026.
sd/-
DEPONENT”
Page 6 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
6. On the basis of the aforesaid affidavits, learned advocate
Mr. Munshaw submitted that, in view of the undertaking given
by the petitioner before this Court that her son would neither
help nor assist her in connection with the work of the agency
and that she would, if required, seek assistance from her
daughter-in-law, Ms. Dharaben Mehul Hakani, the order
terminating the petitioner’s agency may be quashed and set
aside.
6.1. Learned advocate Mr. Munshaw further submitted that
the son of the petitioner, whose alleged conduct is the root
cause of the entire controversy and on account of whose
alleged behaviour the petitioner’s agency came to be
terminated, has also filed an affidavit tendering an
unconditional apology for his conduct and stating on oath that,
henceforth, he shall not enter the premises of the Katargam
Post Office, Surat, in connection with any work relating to the
agency of his mother, Varshaben Prakashbhai Hakani.
6.2. By referring to the aforesaid two affidavits, learned
advocate Mr. Rushabh Munshaw submitted that, considering
the age of the petitioner and the fact that she is a 67-year-old
widow who is responsible for maintaining the household and
Page 7 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
earning a livelihood for herself and her son, who is not
engaged in any employment or occupation, as well as for the
family, the order of termination may be quashed and set aside
on humanitarian grounds. He further submitted that the
charges levelled against the petitioner are neither related to
her integrity, honesty, or devotion towards her work, nor are
they based on any complaint received from any of her clients
regarding her work.
7. Learned AGP Mr.Henil Shah, though opposing the
petition, fairly submitted that there is nothing on record to
indicate that, except for the alleged misbehaviour on the part
of the petitioner’s son, there is any personal allegation against
the petitioner. He, however, submitted that, considering the
conduct of the petitioner’s son and the overall facts and
circumstances of the case, the impugned order came to be
passed and, therefore, the same may not be quashed and set
aside by this Court.
8. Learned Central Government Standing Counsel Mr.Bhate
submitted that the impugned order has been passed by the
State authorities and not by the Central Government
authorities, and therefore, this Court may pass an appropriate
Page 8 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026
C/SCA/10541/2026 (GJHC240522862026) JUDGMENT DATED: 01/09/2026
order.
9. I have heard the learned advocates for the respective
parties and perused the record. Considering the fact that the
petitioner is a 67-year-old widow and that the income derived
by her from the said agency is her sole source of livelihood,
and further considering that the petitioner’s agency came to be
terminated on account of the alleged conduct of her son, who
has tendered an unconditional apology and assured this Court
by way of an affidavit dated 18.08.2026 that he shall not enter
the Katargam Post Office in connection with any work relating
to his mother’s agency, as well as considering the fact that
there is no allegation against the petitioner regarding her
integrity, honesty or conduct in relation to her work or from
any of her clients, this Court is of the view that the impugned
order dated 18.06.2026 passed by respondent No. 2 deserves to
be quashed and set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order
dated 18.06.2026 passed by respondent No. 2 is hereby
quashed and set aside. The petition is accordingly allowed.
Rule is made absolute.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)
BHAVIN MEHTA
Page 9 of 9
Uploaded by BHAVINKUMAR DEVENDRABHAI MEHTA(HCW0108) on Wed Sep 02 2026 Downloaded on : Wed Sep 02 18:39:13 IST 2026