Gujarat High Court High Court

Ashokkumar vs State on 14 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Ashokkumar vs State on 14 November, 2011
Author: Ks Jhaveri,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/14055/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14055 of 2008
 

 
 
=========================================================

 

ASHOKKUMAR
KANTILAL RAVAL - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
MITUL K SHELAT for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR. J.K.Shah AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE
NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for
Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 29/12/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Rule.

Mr. Shah learned AGP waives service of rule on behalf of respondent
no.1.

2. At
the request of learned Advocates for the respective parties the
matter is taken up for hearing.

3. Mr.

Shelat, learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the
impugned order dated 6th January 2006, was passed in
gross violation of principal of natural justice.

4. Learned
Advocate for the respondent is not in a position to show from the
order that any notice was issued to the petitioner before passing
the impugned order. It is evident that the order has been passed
solely on the ground of the of the remarks made in the audit
report of the year 1991, which is in violation of principles of
natural justice.

5. In
view of the above, only on the ground of violation of principles
of natural justice, the impugned order dated 6th January
2006 is quashed and set aside. It will be open for the respondents
to pass appropriate orders after following the proper procedure. It
is clarified that this order is passed without entering into the
merits of the mater and only qua the present petitioner.

6. Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.

(K.S.Jhaveri,J.)

*Himanshu

   

Top