Sca No. 13415 of 2012 · Gujarat High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI Sd/- HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH ========================================= Sd/-
Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be NO allowed to see the judgment ?
To be referred to the Reporter or not ? NO
Whether their Lordships wish to see the NO fair copy of the judgment ?
Whether this case involves a substantial NO question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
Whether it is to be circulated to the civil NO judge ? ========================================= SHAILESHBHAI GOVINDBHAI PATEL - Petitioner Versus STATE OF GUJARAT THRO SECRETARY & 1 - Respondents ========================================= Appearance : MR MIHIR JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL ASSISTED BY MR DILIP B RANA for Petitioner. MR PK JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ASSISTED BY MR RAKESH P PATEL, AGP for Respondent No.1. None for Respondent No.2. ========================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH Date : 05/10/2012 SCA/13415/2012 JUDGMENT ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)
1. We have heard Mr. Mihir Joshi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Dilip Rana appearing for the petitioner and Mr. P.K. Jani, learned Government Pleader assisted by Mr. Rakesh P. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. This petition has been filed on the apprehension that though the petitioner has been elected as Director and the Directors are to elect their Chairman in a meeting, the State Government may nominate three members under Section 80 (2) of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 which may affect the election of the Chairman.
3. The learned Government Pleader has pointed out that Assembly Elections have been declared on 3.10.2012 and moral code of conduct is applicable now. Secondly, he points out that nomination of three members by the State Government could only be made as per the procedure prescribed by a Division Bench in the case of (Shree) Bileshwar Khand Udyog & another v. State of Gujarat and others, 1993 (2) GLH 96.
4. Therefore, in our opinion, the writ petition is premature and is dismissed at this stage with a liberty to the petitioner that he may approach the Court subsequently if any action adverse to the petitioner is initiated or taken by the State Government. Sd/- [V. M. SAHAI, J.] Sd/- [G. B. SHAH, J.] Savariya
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.