SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1993 Supreme(Guj) 91

S.NAINAR SUNDARAM, SHARAD D.DAVE
BILESHWER KHAND UDYOG KHEDUT SAHAKARI MANDALI LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: B.M.MANGUKIYA, HARIN P.RAVAL, SHIRISH JOSHI

S. NAINAR SUNDARAM, J.

( 1 ) THIS Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the order of the learned single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 5609 of 1982. The petitioners in Special Civil Application are the appellants herein and the respondents in the Special Civil Application are the respondents herein. For respondents Nos. 1 to 6 there is representation by the Assistant Government pleader. For respondents Nos. 7 and 8 there is representation by Mr. Shirish J. Joshi.

( 2 ) THE appellants challenge the proceedings under Sec. 80 (2) of the Gujarat co-operative Societies Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, dated 17-12-1982, whereunder respondents Nos. 7 and 8 were appointed as the government nominees in appellant No. 1-Society. The learned single Judge, amongst two contentions, was asked to deal with the contention that the impugned proceedings have come to be passed without appellant No. 1-Society being heard on the question and this violated the principles of natural justice. The learned single Judge found that by express verbalism of Sec. 80 (2) of the Act, there is no such obligation cast upon the State Government to hear the concerned Society and the learned sin








Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top