Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10103/2010 2/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10103 of 2010
=========================================================
DOLARBHAI
V KOTECHA
Versus
STATE
OF GUJAAT AND OTHERS
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PERCY KAVINA, SR ADVOCATE with MR DIPEN A DESAI
for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR PK JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER with MS MANISHA
NARSINGHANI, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for
Respondent(s) : 1 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI
Date
: 10/12/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
matter is taken up for consideration in view of the filing of two
Civil Applications, being Civil Application No.15537 of 2010 in
Special Civil Application No.10103 of 2010 and Civil Application
No.15594 of 2010 in Special Civil Application No.10103 of 2010.
1.1. The
Civil Applications were mentioned in the morning for urgent
circulation. Permission was granted. The papers were received from
the Registry.
2. After
the matter is heard at length, learned senior advocate Mr. Mihir
Joshi appearing with Mr. S.G. Amin for the applicants in those two
civil applications, states that the applicants have no objection if
the Court ensures that the Registrar after giving them reasonable
time to file their reply and after affording them an opportunity of
hearing, decides the matters strictly in accordance with law without
being influenced by the facts that petition is filed by the
petitioner and the Court has passed any orders on that.
3. Learned
Government Pleader Mr. Jani states that, the Registrar acted in the
matter as set out in the affidavit filed by Shri Dilip Raval, IAS,
Registrar, Co-operative Societies along with which a tabular
statement is annexed setting out the dates. He further states that
the Court, if at all, is of the opinion that the Registrar has not
acted upto the expectation of the Court, he is ready to act more
diligently and more meticulously.
3.1. At
the request of the learned Government Pleader, it is made clear that
the Registrar is to act in accordance with law and he has to decide
the matter as per the provisions of the Act and noway, it is to be
construed that the Court has directed the Registrar to by-pass any of
the provisions of law or act in a manner by which principles of
natural justice are violated. It is also clarified that the Court
has not expressed any opinion on merits.
4. Learned
senior advocate Mr. Kavina submitted that it should be construed that
the applicant had the notice right from the month of July 2010 and
therefore, no new notice is required to be issued to the applicants.
4.1. Without
being technical on the point, whether the applicants can be said to
have any notice right from the month of July 2010, as the intimation
given to the applicants on 2.6.2010 about the hearing and as the
applicants are in receipt of the documents on 23.11.2010 which they
wanted to enable them to submit their reply, three weeks’ time is
granted to enable them to file additional reply, if any in the
matter. After such reply is received, the Registrar is directed to
proceed with the matter without granting unreasonable adjournment and
decide the matter as expeditiously as possible, but not later than
21st February 2011, keeping the aforesaid observations in
mind.
5. At
the request of learned senior advocate Mr. Kavina, it is clarified
that this order, noway, substitutes earlier order passed by this
Court dated 20.4.2010 in Special
Civil Application No.2876 of 2010. That order holds the field.
This is in addition to the same.
6. With
the above observations, the petition is disposed of.
(RAVI
R.TRIPATHI, J.)
omkar
Top