IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 270 of 2008 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1921 of 2008 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA ================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
================================================================ SACHIN UDYOGNAGAR SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD Appellant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 4 Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance:
MR AMIT V THAKKAR, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MS NISHA THAKORE, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR CHIRAG B PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 5 RULE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 2 - 4 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.H.VORA
Date : 26/12/2012 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH)
1. The present Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been preferred by the appellant- original petitioner challenging the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 07/02/2008 in Special Civil Application No. 1921/2008 by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the said Special Civil Application confirming the order passed by the learned revisional authority/State Government by which the learned revisional authority has set aside the approval granted by the District Registrar (Industries) for expulsion of respondent no. 5 as a member of the appellant-Society.
2. Respondent no. 5 was enrolled as the member of the appellant-Society and a resolution came to be passed by majority of the members of the General Board of the appellant- Society to expel respondent no. 5 as the member of the appellant-Society, which came to be approved by the District Registrar Co-operative Society (Industries), Surat. The decision of the District Registrar Co-operative Society (Industries), Surat approving the decision of the appellant-Society came to be challenged before the appellate authority and the appellate authority dismissed the said appeal, which was challenged before the revisional authority/State Government. The revisional authority allowed the Revision Application and set aside the approval granting expulsion of respondent no. 5 as member of the appellant-Society. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the revisional authority/State Government allowing the said Revision Application and setting aside the approval granted for expulsion of respondent no. 5 as member of the appellant- Society, the appellant-Society preferred Special Civil Application No. 1921/2008 before the learned Single Judge and the learned Single Judge by impugned judgment and order dated 07/02/2008 has dismissed the said Special Civil Application. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 07/02/2008 in Special Civil Application No. 1921/2008, the appellant-Society has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.
3. At the time of final hearing of the present Letters Patent Appeal, it is reported that there is a broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties that the appellant-Society does not press the present Letters Patent Appeal if respondent no. 5 files an affidavit before this Court clarifying the position under which he was present in the press conference and an undertaking that he shall not repeat the same in future and/or make any reckless allegations against the appellant-Society and/or its office bearers, which may affect the reputation of the appellant- Society and/or office bearers and/or which may be against the interest of the appellant-Society.
4. It is agreed between the parties that respondent no. 5 shall withdraw all other reliefs, which are sought in Lavad Suit No. 1375/2003, which is pending before the learned Board of Nominees, Surat, except the relief with respect to the allotment of the housing plot for the employees.
5. Shri Sanjanwala, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant-Society has stated at the bar, under instructions from his client, who is personally present in the Court, that the appellant-Society shall charge the maintenance from respondent no. 5, which is charged from other members and all the services/facilities shall be given to respondent no. 5 as a member of the appellant-Society and/or holder of the plot in the appellant-Society, which is being given to other members. It is further agreed between the parties that as and when respondent no. 5, as a member of the appellant-Society and/or as an owner of the plot allotted to him in the appellant- Society, applies either for N.A. or submits any layout plan and/or submits an application for development permission, the same shall be counter signed by the office bearers of the appellant-Society and the appellant-Society shall give No Objection for the same.
6. Shri B.S. Patel, learned advocate has appeared for respondent no. 5.
7. The learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties have stated at the bar that it is agreed between the parties that whatever amount is required to be paid for sanctioning the layout plan with respect to the plot held by respondent no. 5, the same shall be borne by the appellant-Society. However, whatever is required to be paid for development permission with respect to the plot in question is concerned, the same shall be borne by respondent no. 5 himself.
8. Shri Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 5 has stated at the bar that the Director of respondent no. 5, Shri Kantibhai Chaute, has filed an affidavit as stated hereinabove. The aforesaid is directed to be taken on record.
9. In view of the above, the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties have requested to dispose of the present Letters Patent Appeal in the above terms.
10. In view of the above broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties recorded hereinabove, the present Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of by observing and directing that the appellant-Society shall charge the maintenance from respondent no. 5, which is being charged from other members of the appellant-Society and shall give similar facilities to respondent no. 5, which is being given to other members of the appellant-Society. It is further observed and directed that respondent no. 5 shall withdraw all the prayers from Lavad Suit No. 1375/2003 pending in the Court of learned Board of Nominees, Surat, except the prayer with respect to allotment of the housing plot and he shall submit necessary purshis before the learned Board of Nominee, Surat within a period of four weeks from today alongwith the copy of the present order. Meaning thereby, Lavad Suit No. 1375/2003 stands dismissed as withdrawn except for the relief with respect to the allotment of the housing plot. It is also further observed and directed that as and when respondent no. 5 applies for N.A. and/or submits the lay out plan or submits an application for development permission, the appellant-Society and/or its office bearers shall grant No Objection Certificate at the earliest and wherever counter signature is required the same shall be counter signed immediately. It is also directed and observed that whatever charge is required to be paid for sanction of the layout plan of the Society/plot in question the same shall be borne by the appellant-Society (as agreed) and whatever charge for development permission and/or any other permission is required to be paid for the plot in question the same shall be borne by respondent no. 5 (as agreed). It is also observed that the present order shall be without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the appellant-Society against any other persons, and it shall be restricted to respondent no. 5 only.
10. With this, the present Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of.
(M.R.SHAH, J.) (S.H.VORA, J.) siji