Gujarat High Court High Court

N vs State on 6 May, 2011

Gujarat High Court
N vs State on 6 May, 2011
Author: Anant S. Dave,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/1388320/2008	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 13883 of 2008
 

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

N
P PATEL & COMPANY - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

============================================ 
Appearance
: 
MR BM
MANGUKIYA for Petitioner(s) : 1,MS BELA A
PRAJAPATI for Petitioner(s) : 1, 
MR VIPUL MISTRY ASST. GOVERNMENT
PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
============================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 01/12/2008 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

Draft
amendment is granted and to be carried out forthwith.

Heard
Shri B.M.Mangukiya, learned advocate for the petitioner and learned
AGP for the respondent-State.

Learned
AGP seeks time to file reply after obtaining instructions in this
matter.

Shri
B.M.Mangukiya, learned advocate, for the petitioner contends that
though show cause notice was issued on 22.5.2008 with a view to
comprise/compound the issues but thereafter no hearing was fixed and
though the petitioner requested for relevant documents to answer the
show cause notice, all the documents were not supplied and,
therefore, the impugned order dated 15.11.2008 passed by the
authority deserves to be stayed. Learned advocate further submits
that the authority passing the impugned order dated 15.11.2008 is not
empowered to pass such order.

Learned
AGP submits that according to authority relevant documents were
supplied on 11.6.2008 and the impugned order is passed after issuance
of show cause notice.

Prima
facie, on perusal of the impugned order it reveals that payment of
amount in question towards royalty and other charges, is passed
without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing and even earlier
order dated 16.9.2008 reveals causes to be shown by the petitioner
and certain provisions of the rules for passing the impugned order.

In
view of the above, Notice returnable on 30th
December, 2008.

Ad
interim relief in terms of execution and implementation of the
impugned order dated 15.11.2008 passed by the respondents is stayed.

Direct
service is permitted.

[ANANT
S. DAVE, J.]

//smita//

   

Top