1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

Nikhilkumar vs Heard

High Court Of Gujarat|21 June, 2012


1. Heard learned advocate Mr. A.S. Vakil appearing for the applicant. Learned advocate invited attention of the Court to the order passed in Special Civil Application No.4675 of 2012 on 30/04/2012, wherein Paragraph-5 reads as under:-
"The petition is required to be admitted, hence, Rule returnable on 23/07/2012. To be heard with S.C.A. No.2974 of 2012. In the mean time and till the final disposal of the petition, the petitioner shall not be restrained from carrying out mining activities and obtaining Royalty Passes, if he is otherwise eligible and not restricted by any other authority under any other prohibitory orders. It is open to the authorities to pass appropriate order after affording an opportunity to the petitioner in respect of demand in question."
2. Learned advocate Mr. Vakil invited attention of the Court to Paragraph-4 in the petition and submitted that the said Misc. Civil Application for Contempt was disposed of by order dated 21/06/2012. A copy of which, is produced at Annexure-14, wherein, this Court was pleased to observe in Paragraphs-2 and 3, as under:-
" Para-2 Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court, Mr. Rahul Dave, learned Asst. Government Pleader tenders the letter dated 17/05/2012, whereby the Royalty Passes are issued. The apprehension is voiced by Mr. A.S. Vakil, learned advocate for the applicant, that it may not happen that every time the applicant is required to file contempt proceeding because after the passes which are already issued are exhausted, new passes also may be required to be issued.
Para-3 In order to allay the alleged apprehension, Mr. Dave, learned Asst. Government Pleader, under the instructions of Mr. T.J. Patel, Geologist, states that until the mining operations are continued in accordance with law, the Royalty Passes, from time to time, shall be issued."
3. Learned advocate Mr. A.S. Vakil invited attention of the Court to the averments made in Paragraph-10.
3.1 Learned advocate Mr. Vakil submitted that before filing of the present petition for contempt, the applicant did issue notice to the contemptner on 16/10/2012. A copy of which, is produced at Annexure-16. The matter requires consideration. Rule. Notice as to interim-relief returnable on 7th November, 2012. In the meanwhile, if the respondent nos. 2 and 3 do not purge the contempt, they shall remain present in the Court at 11:00 a.m. Direct service is permitted.
ANJARIA, J) aruna
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.

Nikhilkumar vs Heard


High Court Of Gujarat

21 June, 2012