Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
MCA/638/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION- FOR CLARIFICATION No. 638 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1211 of 2010
=========================================================
DISTRICT
DEVELOPMENT OFFICER - Applicant(s)
Versus
SHABBIRHUSSAIN
HAYATMIYA CHAUHAN & 5 - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
AMIT PANCHAL FOR MR PINAKIN M RAVAL
for
Applicant(s) : 1,
MR DILIP B RANA for Opponent(s) : 1,
GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for Opponent(s) : 2,
None for Opponent(s) : 3 -
6.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 26/03/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Present
application has been submitted by the applicant District
Development Officer, Gandhinagar to clarify / modify order passed by
this Court dtd.22/2/2010 in Special Civil Application No. 1211 of
2010 to the extent of directing the Mamlatdar to inquire into with
respect to issue of cutting of the trees pending before him in Case
No.7 of 2009.
At
the outset, Mr.Amit Panchal, learned advocate appearing on behalf of
the applicant does not press the present application,
as the applicant has now already complied with the order passed by
this Court dtd.25/11/2009 in Special
Civil Application No. 12296 of 2009.
Under
the circumstances, present application is dismissed as not pressed
in view of the subsequent development.
Now,
so far as the order passed by this Court dtd.23/3/2010 in the
present proceedings is concerned, Mr.Panchal, learned
advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant
District
Development Officer, Gandhinagar has disputed the
statement made by Mr.Pinakin M. Raval who earlier appeared on behalf
of the applicant. Mr.Sunit Shah, learned advocate who appeared for
Mr.Pinakin M. Raval, learned advocate as well as Mr.Pinakin M.
Raval, learned advocate have made a statement at the bar that there
were some misunderstanding on the part of Mr.Pinakin M. Raval,
learned advocate and therefore, the statement was recorded in the
order dtd.23/3/2010. However, he has tendered unconditional apology
and has assured this Court that similar mistake shall not occur in
future.
Accepting
the unconditional apology, present proceedings are terminated as it
is and no further steps are taken.
With
these present application is dismissed as not pressed.
[M.R.
SHAH, J.]
rafik
Top