Gujarat High Court High Court

M/S vs State on 9 April, 2010

Gujarat High Court
M/S vs State on 9 April, 2010
Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Honourable Mr.Justice Kureshi,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/1403/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 1403 of 2009
 

In


 

MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR ORDERS No. 1521 of 2009
 

In


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7915 of 1990
 

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


 

M/S
RAINBOW SURGICAL DRESSING MANUFACTURING CO. & 3 - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

=================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
BJ TRIVEDI for Appellant(s) : 1   4.                               
                                                                MR JT
TRIVEDI for Appellant(s) : 1 - 4. 
MS MANISHA LAVKUMAR, AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR SN SHELAT, SR. ADVOCATE with RM CHHAYA for
Respondent(s) : 2, 
=================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 09/04/2010  
ORAL ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)

The
writ petition preferred by the appellants was disposed of with the
consent of the parties with liberty to the appellants to revive the
prayers in case of non-compliance. On the ground that the
authorities have not complied with the order, as was contended before
the Court, the Misc. Civil Application was filed which having not
entertained by the learned Single Judge, the present appeal has been
preferred.

2. The
learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents rightly
submitted that once a writ petition is finally disposed of, the
matter cannot be reopened by filing miscellaneous petition. In this
connection, we may refer to the decision in the case of State
of Haryana vs Babu Singh,

reported
in AIR 2009 SC 472, wherein the Court observed that once the order
passed

in
writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
had attained finality, the matter cannot be reopened by filing
miscellaneous petition. For the said reason, we are not inclined to
entertain
this writ petition, but allow the appellants to file a fresh writ
petition, if the earlier consented order has not been complied with.

3. The appeal stands
disposed of with the aforesaid observations. No costs.

[S.J.

MUKHOPADHAYA, CJ.]

[AKIL
KURESHI, J.]

sundar/-

   

Top