Gujarat High Court
Kasambhai Manubhai Ajmeri vs District Development Officer & ... on 27 August, 2015
Author: S.R.Brahmbhatt
Bench: S.R.Brahmbhatt, R.P.Dholaria
C/MCA/2400/2015 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONTEMPT) NO. 2400 of 2015
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7588 of 2004
==============================================================
KASAMBHAI MANUBHAI AJMERI....Applicant
Versus
DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER & 2....Opponents
==============================================================
Appearance:
MR TR MISHRA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant
==============================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA
Date : 27/08/2015
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.BRAHMBHATT) Heard learned advocate for the applicant. The direction contained in the order dated 12.11.2014 was required to be complied with in its totality by the respondents and the applicant was required to be given all the benefits flowing from the Government Resolution dated 17.10.1988 from 08.07.1987. The inaction on the part of the concerned prompted the petitioner to send a letter in the form of notice to all the concerned on 25.11.2014, but that was of no avail, as there appears to be no reply, nor any action on the said notice.
The Court, therefore, is of the view that prima facie there appears to be willful disobedience on the part of the concerned in not complying with Page 1 of 2 HC-NIC Page 1 of 2 Created On Fri Aug 28 02:00:35 IST 2015 C/MCA/2400/2015 ORDER the orders, else there would have been some reply to the advocate notice which said to have been received by the respondents.
In this view of the matter, let there be a notice returnable on 21.09.2015 and by the returnable date the respondent no.2 himself shall file an affidavit narrating and explaining the circumstances under which the order of this Court had remained to be complied with.
In case, if no such affidavit-in-reply is placed on record by the returnable date, the respondent no.2 himself shall remain present before this Court on the returnable date for answering in person the allegations and averments made in this petition, as the Court has already observed that there exists prima facie case for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Court Act.
Direct service permitted.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Pankaj Page 2 of 2 HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Fri Aug 28 02:00:35 IST 2015