Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
MCA/1985/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC.CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 1985 of 2010
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2234 of 2009
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3476 of 2009
=========================================
VICTORIA
JUBILEE HOSPITAL TRUST - Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Opponent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
S TRIPATHY for Applicant(s) : 1,
MR UMESH TRIVEDI, ADDITIONAL
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Opponent(s) : 1,
None for Opponent(s) : 2 -
3, 5,
MR DHAVAL G NANAVATI for Opponent(s) :
4,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE K.M.THAKER
Date
: 09/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
The
controversy relates to an error in the Revenue records. The writ
petition – SCA No. 3476 of 2009 was dismissed by the learned Single
Judge without any ground, without recording the grievance, merely on
the basis of statement made by learned AGP and orders passed by
different authorities were set aside on 13.5.2009.
2. Against
the said order, State Government preferred LPA No. 2234 of 2009,
wherein the Division Bench by order dated 25.2.2010 observed that
ends of justice shall be met if the Ahmedabad District Collector
carries out the rectification procedure as directed by the learned
Single Judge, keeping in view the relevant records, and the appeal
was dismissed with the aforesaid observation.
3. After
Division Bench order, the Collector, Ahmedabad passed order on
10.6.2010. The petitioner applied for a copy of the said order, but
his grievance is that even after 3 months the said order and other
records have not been supplied. The Misc. Civil Application has been
therefore preferred by the petitioner to direct the Collector not to
implement the order dated 10.6.2010 with further prayer to recall
last portion of the order dated 25.2.2010 passed in LPA No. 2234 of
2009, whereby the Division Bench ordered to take correctional
measures within six months.
4. Counsel
appearing on behalf of the petitioner would contend that the
Collector hurriedly passed order on 10.6.2010, without giving proper
opportunity to the petitioner and such illegal order has been passed
hurriedly only because of observation of Division Bench dated
25.2.2010.
5. On
hearing the counsel for the parties and from the record, it will be
evident that the petitioner preferred the writ petition SCA No.
7476 of 2009, wherein the Court set aside the order on the basis of
statement made by learned AGP and the Collector, Ahmedabad was
directed to initiate appropriate action to rectify the error in
accordance with law. The said order has not been challenged by the
petitioner and that he is happy with the order. The Division Bench
dismissed the appeal and confirmed the said order. In this
background, the question of recalling last portion of the order dated
25th Feb. 2010 does not arise, which will amount to
alteration of the order passed by the learned Single Judge in the
writ petition preferred by the petitioner, which reached finality.
If petitioner is not happy with one or other order, he may move
before appropriate forum. The Misc. Civil Application is uncalled
for and is accordingly dismissed.
(S.J.
Mukhopadhaya, C.J.)
(K.M.Thaker,
J.)
*/Mohandas
Top