1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Rajesh Soni appearing for the petitioner.
2. It is submitted that advance copy of the petition has been served to learned advocate for the respondent no.1 and 2 i.e. in the office of the Government Pleader.
3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction on part of respondent nos.1 and 2 inasmuch as despite the orders passed by the District Registrar and also by the Board of Nominee, the respondent no.2 does not receive milk from the petitioner society and its members.
4. It is alleged by the petitioner that though directions have been passed, respondent no.2 is not complying the said directions.
5. It is also claimed by learned advocate for the petitioner that because of inaction on part of respondent no.1 to enforce the directions and inaction on part of respondent no.2 to act in accordance with the directions passed by respondent no.1 and Board of Nominee, the petitioner has been compelled to file application before the Board of Nominee under Order 39 Rule 2(A) for breach/non compliance of the directions by the Board of Nominees.
6. However, the matter has not been heard and respondent no.2 is not complying the directions.
7. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that it is in such circumstances that the petitioner has approached the Court with a request that the application preferred by present petitioner under Order 39(2)(A) may be heard on day to day basis.
8. Learned AGP Ms. Chitaliya has appeared for respondent no.1 and 2. She could not give any explanation about the inaction on part of respondent no.1 in taking action against respondent no.2 under Section-160(3) of the Act for disobeying the directions passed by him i.e. respondent no.1. She however, submitted that hearing of the application filed by petitioner under Order 39(2)(A) before the Board of Nominee is scheduled for hearing today.
9. Learned counsel for the petitioner has made grievance that the proceedings are being been adjourned for unjustifiable reason and any orders are not being passed.
10. In view of the grievance made by learned counsel for the petitioner, present petition can be disposed of at this stage with below mentioned observations.
11.1. The respondent no.1 shall take appropriate and early action, in accordance with the law and relevant rules against the respondent no.2 for breach of the order dated 21/02/2012 passed by him i.e. by respondent no.1.
11.2. It is further clarified that the Board of Nominee shall hear and decide the application dated 27/02/2012 filed by present petitioner under Order 39 Rule 2(A) as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of one week from receiving copy of present order.
11.3. The Court is conscious of the fact that present order is being passed upon hearing of respondent no.1 though respondent no.2 is not before the Court. However, since respondent no.1 has already passed order dated 21/02/2012 and only observations made by the Court are qua respondent no.1 to take appropriate action in accordance with law, with reference to order dated 21/02/2012, respondent no.2 has not been invited inasmuch as when respondent no.1 takes any appropriate action the respondent no.2 will be heard by respondent no.1. Similarly observations with regard to application dated 27/02/2012 filed by present petitioner which are made in present order are directed to the Board of Nominee to hear and decide the application as expeditiously as possible and that therefore, the Board of Nominee would hear respondent no.2 during the process of hearing of application dated 27/02/2012. Having regard to the aforesaid aspects the respondent no.2 has not been invited before passing present order.
11.4. It is further, clarified that if at all respondent no.2 is aggrieved by present order, though ordinarily there would not be any reason for being aggrieved since respondent no.2 will be heard by respondent no.1 as well as by Board of Nominee before passing any order, it will be open to respondent no.2 to take out appropriate application for verification/modification of the present order.
12. With the aforesaid clarification and observations, present petition stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(K.M.THAKER, J.) (ila) Top