Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
MCA/2658/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 2658 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11846 of 2009
=========================================================
GOVINDBHAI
CHHAGANBHAI PATANWADIA - Applicant(s)
Versus
PATHAK
JIGISHABEN VIJAYKUMAR SECRETARY & 5 - Opponent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Applicant(s) : 1,MR PP MAJMUDAR for Applicant(s) : 1,
None for
Opponent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.B.ANTANI
Date
: 21/10/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
The
basis of the present petition is the alleged non-implementation of
the order passed by this Court dated 1.12.2009 in Special Civil
Application No.11846 of 2009, whereby the directions was given to
the appellate Committee to decide the matter preferably within the
stipulated time limit.
We
have heard Mr.Majmudar, learned Counsel for the petitioner.
It
is an admitted position that the appellant Committee has taken the
decision and the decision of the appellate Committee is produced by
the petitioner at Annexure-D dated 12.4.2010. Merely because it is
not signed by the Secretary of the appellate Committee would not
result into non-compliance to the directions of this Court. If the
decision of the appellate Committee is not enforced or not
implemented, such grievance cannot be validly raised in the
jurisdiction of this Court under the Contempt of Courts Act. It
does appear that the petitioner had preferred an application for
implementation of the decision of the Appellate Committee by
preferring Special Civil Application No.5904 of 2010 and the learned
Single Judge, prima facie, observed that there is also alternative,
efficacious remedy of preferring contempt application for
implementation of the impugned order. The impugned order means the
order of the Appellate Committee. When the Appellate Committee has
already taken decision merely because some member did not sign or
not or its enforcement cannot be a subject matter to invoke the
jurisdiction under the Contempt of Courts Act.
In
view of the above, we are not inclined to initiate the proceedings
under the Contempt of Courts Act. Suffice it to observe that if any
appropriate proceedings are initiated for enforcement of the order
of the Appellate Committee, which is said to have been passed, the
rights and contentions of both the sides shall remain open.
Disposed
of accordingly.
(Jayant
Patel, J.)
(H.
B. Antani, J.)
vinod
Top