(Per : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA) This is an application for review of an order dated 12th March 2012 passed by this Bench in SCA No. 1838 of 2012 by which we dismissed a writ-application filed by the writ-petitioners where the petitioners challenged the provisions of section 56 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 as ultra vires Article 15 and 243.D of the Constitution of India.
It many not be out of place to mention here that since the provisions of section 56 of the Act was challenged as ultra vires the Constitution of India, according to the rules framed by this Court, the matter came up before the Division Bench and while disposing of the matter, we restricted scrutiny only to the above question.
After hearing Mr. Parmar appearing on behalf of the petitioners and after going through materials on record we find that we dealt with the question raised by Mr. Parmar in our order dated 12th March 2012. We do not find any error, not to speak of an error apparent on the face of the record, justifying the review of our order. Mr. Parmar tried to re-argue the matter on merits which, in our opinion, is not permissible within the limited scope of review. Mr. Parmar apprehended that if we do not further elaborate the question sought to be reviewed here, his client will face difficulties in approaching higher forum. We, however, find that we having specifically dealt with the question whether the said provision is ultra vires Article 15 and 243.D of the Constitution of India which was the point taken in the writ application, the apprehension of Mr. Parmar is without any basis.
Lastly, Mr. Parmar, however tried to impress upon us regarding illegality of the meeting by which his client was removed. We have already pointed out that in the original writ-application, the question was limited only to the illegality of the provisions contained in section 56 of the Act and thus we have no occasion to enter into other question now sought to be raised before us.
We, thus, find no merits in this application and consequently the same is dismissed. We also make it clear that we have, apart from the question of validity of the aforesaid provision, not gone into other illegality or irregularity in the process of removal.
This application is dismissed accordingly.
Certified copy, if applied for, be given within three working days from the date of application.
[BHASKAR BHATTACHARYA, ACTING C.J.] mathew [J.B.PARDIWALA. J.] Top