Gujarat High Court
Brijrajsinh Hemantsinh Jadeja vs State Of Gujarat on 13 March, 2018
Author: R.Subhash Reddy
Bench: R.Subhash Reddy, Vipul M. Pancholi
C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 950 of 2017
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11321 of 2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION/1/2017
With
CIVIL APPLICATION/2/2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
==========================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to
see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law
as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any
order made thereunder ?
==========================================================
BRIJRAJSINH HEMANTSINH JADEJA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR BS PATEL FOR MR CHIRAG B PATEL(3679) for the PETITIONER(s)
No. 1
MR BHARAT T RAO(697) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
MR PK JANI, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL WITH MS. SHRUTI
PATHAK, AGP for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 3,4
NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Page 1 of 8
C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT
Date : 13/03/2018
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY)
1. The 4th respondent in Special Civil Application No.11321 of 2017 has filed this appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, aggrieved by the order dated 15.6.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge.
2. Special Civil Application is filed by respondent No.1 herein with the prayers, which read as under:
"(A) To admit and allow this petition;
(B) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the orders dated 6.5.2017 passed by the respondent no.2 rejecting the application of the petitioner for joining party and also order dated 2.6.2017 passed by the respondent no.2 dropping the show cause notice issued against respondent no.4 for removal under Rule32 of the Rules for the reasons stated Page 2 of 8 C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT in the memo of the petition and in the interest of justice;
(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and operation of the impugned order dated 2.6.2017 passed by the respondent no.2 dropping the show cause notice dated 18/19.4.2017 issued to the respondent no.4 and further be pleased to restrain the respondent no.4 from acting as Director of the Jamnagar District Cooperative Bank Ltd. And restrain him from participating in any of the meetings of the Bank as Director for the reasons stated in the memo of the petition and in the interest of justice;
(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS may Grant adinterim relief in terms of prayer clause (C);
(E) YOUR LORDSHIPS may pass such other and further orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in favour of the petitioner in the interest of justice and circumstances of the case."
3. By order dated 15.6.2017, while issuing notice to the respondents, the learned Single Page 3 of 8 C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT Judge has granted interim relief in terms of paragraph No.26(C) of the petition.
4. The appellant herein, who is the 4th respondent in the Special Civil Application, is elected as Director of Jamnagar District Co operative Bank. The 4th respondent herein has initiated proceedings against the appellant for disqualification by issuing showcause notice, as contemplated under the provisions of Gujarat Co operative Societies Act, 1961 and Rule 32 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Rules, 1965. Upon filing reply to the showcause notice, the 4th respondentcompetent authority has passed order dated 2.6.2017, dropping the proceedings initiated against the appellant herein. When the proceedings were pending, the 1st respondent herein has filed application for joining as a party in the proceedings. The said application is also rejected by order dated 6.5.2017.
5. The 1st respondent herein, aggrieved by the order dated 6.5.2017, rejecting his Page 4 of 8 C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT application for joining as a party and further, aggrieved by the order dated 2.6.2017, dropping the proceedings initiated against the appellant herein, has approached this Court by filing the Special Civil Application. In paragraph No.26(C) of the petition, the 1st respondentoriginal petitioner prayed to stay the execution, implementation and operation of the order dated 2.6.2017 and the show cause notice dated 18/19.4.2017, to restrain the appellant herein from functioning as Director of Jamnagar District Cooperative Bank and further, to restrain him from participating in any of the meetings of the bank as a Director. Such relief is granted by the learned Single Judge, while issuing notice in the petition.
6. We have heard learned counsels, Mr. B.S.Patel, appearing for the appellant, Mr.Bharat Rao appearing for the 1st respondent and learned Additional Advocate General, Mr.P.K.Jani with learned Assistant Government Page 5 of 8 C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT Pleader, Ms.Shruti Pathak, appearing for the 3rd and the 4th respondents.
7. At the outset, it is to be noticed that, by way of main relief in the petition, the 1st respondent has challenged the order dated 6.5.2017, rejecting his application for joining as a party in the proceedings initiated by the 4th respondent and further order dated 2.6.2017 by which, the 4th respondent has dropped the proceedings initiated against the appellant herein for disqualification as a Director of Jamnagar District Cooperative Bank. Though proceedings initiated against the appellant Director are dropped by the competent authority, in paragraph No.26(C) of the petition, the 1st respondent herein, not only claimed relief to stay the execution, implementation and operation of such orders, but also sought further direction to restrain the appellant herein from acting as a Director of Jamnagar District Cooperative Bank and to restrain him from participating in its Page 6 of 8 C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT meetings. After hearing the learned counsels and perusing the orders and other materials on record, we are of the clear opinion that, the learned Single Judge has committed error by granting such relief by way of interim order, even before the petition is disposed of, finally. It is clear that, by virtue of such order, an order, which can be passed only at the stage of disposal of the petition, has been passed by way of interim order. When the proceedings initiated for disqualification are dropped by the competent authority, there is no reason, either to stay such proceedings or to restrain the appellant Director, who is duly elected, from functioning as a Director of the bank. Further, no reasons have been assigned for granting of such a relief and if the same is allowed to stand, it amounts to allowing the main relief at the interlocutory stage, even without hearing the affected party. In view of the above, we are of the considered view that, it is a fit case to set aside the order dated 15.6.2017 passed by the learned Page 7 of 8 C/LPA/950/2017 JUDGMENT Single Judge.
8. For the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 15.6.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge, to the extent of granting relief in terms of paragraph No.26(C) of the petition, is set aside. It is open for the 1st respondent herein to make a request before the learned Single Judge for expeditious disposal of the petition. If such a request is made, it is for the learned Single Judge to consider such request.
9. Letters Patent Appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. Consequently, Civil Applications also stand disposed of.
(R.SUBHASH REDDY, CJ) (VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J) RADHAKRISHNAN K.V. Page 8 of 8