Gujarat High Court High Court

Kosamba vs Surat on 28 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Kosamba vs Surat on 28 October, 2010
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/9167/1997	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9167 of 1997
 

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

 

KOSAMBA
GRAM PANCHAYAT - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SURAT
DISTRICT PANCHAYAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
SV PARMAR for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR CJ VIN for Respondent(s) :
1, 
MR PRANAV DAVE, LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 28/10/2010
 

ORAL
ORDER

After
arguing the matter, Mr.S.V. Parmar, learned advocate for the
petitioner, states that without entertaining into the merits of the
matter, the petitioner is ready and willing to approach the
respondent-Collector pursuant to provisions of Section 113 of the
Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993. He has, therefore, submitted that
appropriate directions may be issued to the respondent-Collector to
consider the case of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible.

Heard
learned counsel for the parties. Looking to the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the case and in view of the aforesaid statement
made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the evidence on
record, the petitioner will approach the respondent-Collector by way
of making a representation within a period of two months from today.
The respondent-Collector is directed to consider the same within a
period of six months from the date of receipt of such form. It is
clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the
merits of the case.

With
the above observations and directions, present petition stands
disposed of. Rule
is discharged with no order as to costs. Interim relief, if any,
stands vacated.

Direct
Service is permitted.

(K.S.

Jhaveri, J)

Aakar

   

Top