Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/8647/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8647 of 2010
=========================================================
RANIBEN
BHANABHAI BARAD THRO POA ARJANBHAI M MORI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
COLLECTOR
& 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
NANAVATI
ASSOCIATES for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 1, 3,
MS JIRGA
JHAVERI, AGP for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
Date
: 30/08/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned senior advocate Mr. K.S. Nanavati with learned advocate Mr.
Prabhav Mehta for Nanavati Associates appearing on behalf of
petitioner and learned AGP Ms. Jirga Jhaveri appearing on behalf of
respondent – State Authority.
Page
– 91 is an order passed by District Collector, Junagadh dated
13th
August 2007, where, petitioner remained absence in spite of notices
served by District Collector, Junagadh to petitioner, therefore, in
absence of petitioner, order has been passed by District Collector,
Junagadh. Against that, revision application was preferred by
petitioner before revisional authority under Section 30 of the Mines
and Minerals Development and Regulation Act, 1957 read with Rule 55
of the Minerals Concession Rules, 1960, wherein also, considering
observations made
by revisional authority in Para 6 that petitioner remained absent
even after intimation and so the case is being considered on record
and order passed on merit.
Learned
senior advocate Mr. Nanavati raised contention before this Court that
District Collector, Junagadh has no jurisdiction to pass such order
on 13th
August 2007, therefore, order passed by District Collector, Junagadh
is without jurisdiction.
Unfortunately,
petitioner remained absent in both proceedings before both
authorities, therefore, in such circumstances, it is open for
petitioner to file application before revisional authority –
respondent No.3 with a prayer to set aside ex-parte order which was
passed in absence of petitioner within a period of one month from the
date of receiving copy of present order.
After
receiving application from petitioner to set aside ex-parte order by
revisional authority – respondent No.3, it is directed
respondent No.3 to consider such application which has been received
from petitioner and examine the grievance which has been raised by
petitioner in his application and thereafter to pass appropriate
reasoned order in accordance with law after giving reasonable
opportunity of hearing to respective parties within a period
of four months from the date of receiving such application from
petitioner and communicate decision to petitioner immediately.
It
is hope that meanwhile, respondent authority may not take coercive
action against petitioner as further proceeding is filed by
petitioner before revisional authority.
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
