Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10752/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10752 of 2010
=========================================================
NARSIBHAI
LALABHAI MAKWANA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PR NANAVATI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,MR BS KHATANA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR AMIT
PATEL, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
4.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 07/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocates appearing on behalf of respective parties.
In
present petition, petitioner has challenged order passed by
respondent No.2 dated 26th
August, 2010, Page 16, Annexure ‘A’ in Appeal No.43 of 2010, wherein,
respondent No.2 has set aside order passed by Collector, Banaskantha
while remanding matter back to District Collector, Banaskantha with a
direction to decide a fresh entire matter after examining necessary
investigation in respect of complaint filed by 86 persons against
present petitioner and meanwhile, interim relief, which was granted,
has been vacated and also it is directed that during pendency of
remanded matter, respondent No.4 may continue with Fair Price Shop.
Learned
advocate Mr. Nanavati is having serious objection about interim order
passed by respondent No.2 with a direction in favour of respondent
No.4 that let he may continue with fair price shop. The anxiety of
learned advocate Mr. Nanavati is that if this interim direction which
was given by respondent No.2 by order dated 26th August,
2010 is complied, then it will create equity in favour of respondent
No.4.
Therefore,
according to my opinion, when both learned advocates were agreed,
Page 20, for remanding matter back to District Collector, Banaskantha
as noted by respondent No.2 in respect of having examination or
investigation of complaint given by 86 persons and if direction is to
be issued to District Collector, Banaskantha to decide remanded
matter in one month instead of two months and all respective parties
must co-operate the hearing, it will meet end of justice between the
parties.
Therefore,
it is directed to District Collector, Banaskantha to decide remanded
matter as per order passed by respondent No.2 in Appeal No.43 of 2010
dated 26th August 2010 within a period of one month from
the date of receiving copy of present order after giving reasonable
opportunity of hearing to all respective parties and all respective
parties must cooperate the hearing before District Collector,
Banaskantha and it is made clear that whatever benefit is made
available to respondent No.4 because of interim direction issued by
respondent No.2 which will not create any equity in his favour in
future and same will be subject to final outcome of remanded matter.
In
view of above observation and direction, present petition is disposed
of by this Court without expressing any opinion on merits.
Direct
service is permitted.
[H.K.
RATHOD, J.]
#Dave
Top