(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) The applicant-original petitioner No.1 of Special Civil Application No. 18702 of 2011 has moved this application urging this Court to take action against the respondents for committing contempt of two orders dated 27.12.2011 and 29.12.2011 both orders passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No. 18702 of 2011/ By order dated 27.12.2011, Division Bench provided that the name of the petitioner shall be deemed to have been included in the preliminary list of voters to be published on 22.12.2011. After this interim order was passed, further interim directions came to be issued by the Bench on 29.12.2011 providing that the names of the petitioners would be included in the final voters list which was to be published on 31.12.2011. It was of course made clear that such inclusion would be subject to further or final orders of the Court.
On 31.12.2011, the authorized officer of APMC Rajkot conveyed to the applicant society that the election of APMC Rajkot has been suspended by virtue of the letter dated 27.12.2011 of the State Government. It was also stated that such suspension was published in the local news paper Akila on 29.12.2011. The authorized officer therefore conveyed that "Accordingly, the election to APMC, Rajkot are suspended at the stage where they are at present and upon publication of the revised election programme by the Director when the final list of voters will be published on that date, the orders dated 27.12.2011 and 29.12.2011 made by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. 18702/2011 will be implemented in respect to the final voters list."
From the above developments, it can be seen that due to suspension of the election itself, final voters list was not published though it was previously scheduled to be done on 31.12.2011. When the final list itself was not published, non-inclusion of the petitioners in such list would not give rise to any contempt proceedings. In our view, therefore, there is no cause to take the contempt action against any of the respondents.
In view of the above observations and particularly in view of the communication dated 31.12.2011 of the authorized officer, portion of which is reproduced herein above, learned counsel for the applicant does not press this contempt petition. This contempt petition is disposed of accordingly. Notice is discharged.
(Akil Kureshi,J.) (C.L.
Soni,J.) an vyas Top