Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Kamuben Kadvaji Thakor vs District Development Officer & 2 on 10 August, 2017

Author: Rajesh H.Shukla

Bench: Rajesh H.Shukla

                  C/SCA/5213/2017                                              ORDER




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                     SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5213 of 2017

         ==========================================================
                      KAMUBEN KADVAJI THAKOR....Petitioner(s)
                                   Versus
                DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & 2....Respondent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         HEENA D RANA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR DILIP B RANA, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
         MR HS MUNSHAW, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2
         NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 1 , 3
         ==========================================================

          CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA

                                    Date : 10/08/2017
                                        ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned advocate Shri Dilip Rana for the petitioner and learned advocate Shri H S Munshaw for the respondent Nos.2 and 3.

2. Learned advocate Shri Rana has raised the contention regarding the opportunity of hearing at the time of passing the resolution for no confidence motion. He has referred to the resolution and the papers and also contended that the petitioner, who is elected representative could not have been removed in such a manner by the members. He has referred to and relied upon the judgment of the High Court reported in 2012 (2) GLR 1096.

3. Learned advocate Shri Munshaw stated that the petitioner, who was absent in the meeting, cannot be heard to Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:52:03 IST 2017 C/SCA/5213/2017 ORDER say that opportunity was not given. In any case, even according to the rules i.e. The Gujarat Panchayats Procedure Rules require consideration whether it could be clinched that hearing is not given after remaining absent. The judgment of the Hon'ble full Bench of the High Court reported in 2012 (2) GLR 1096, is on different aspect as is evident from the head note as well as the discussion.

4. In any view of the matter, it requires consideration. Hence, Rule returnable on 21.09.2017. However, as the charge has already been taken over, interim relief is refused.

(RAJESH H.SHUKLA, J.) ABHISHEK Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Mon Aug 14 07:52:03 IST 2017