Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/9084/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9084 of 2008
=========================================================
SAMATBHAI
ALABHAI JARIYA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DISTRICT
COLLECTOR - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
M/S
THAKKAR ASSOC. for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR JK SHAH ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 22/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Mr.Navin Pahwa for the petitioner and learned AGP
Mr.J.K.Shah for the respondent.
The
petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.06.2008 passed by the
Collector, Rajkot. By the said order, the Collector had directed the
Vice President of Morbi Municipality to take charge from the
President.
The
petition arises in the following factual backgrounds.
With
respect to the question of disqualification of some of the members of
Morbi Municipality, Special Civil Application No.7093 of 2008 came to
be filed. Since such disqualification would have bearing on the
election of the President, apparently, on 19.06.2008 the learned
Single Judge of this Court passed the following order.
?SThe
elections as scheduled can take place. The result may also be
declared. The finality of the result will be subject to the final
outcome of the petition.
Put
up on 23rd June 2008.??
Construing
the said order as not permitting the elected President to take
charge, the Collector passed the impugned order.
The
petitioner has stated in the petition to the effect that by the time
the order was passed, the petitioner has taken over the charge and
also discharged his duties.
Be
that as it may, the short question is that did the learned Single
Judge of this Court in his order intend that the elected President
should not discharge his duties during the pendency of the petition.
From
plain reading of the order dated 19.06.2008, no such intention
emerges. Clearly, the Court wanted that the election process be
continued and be completed and even declaration of the result was
specifically not stayed. The only rider provided by the Court that
finality of the result would be subject tot he outcome of the
petition.
Under
the circumstances, to prevent the petitioner from discharging his
duties only on the basis of the said interim order, was not legal.
The impugned order, therefore, suffers from illegality and is,
therefore, required to be quashed and it is ordered accordingly.
Consequently,
the petition succeeds. The petitioner shall, of course, discharge his
duties subject to further outcome in Special Civil Application
No.7093 of 2008.
Rule
is made absolute. Interim relief granted earlier stands confirmed.
(
Akil Kureshi, J. )
kailash
Top