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

2014 Supreme(Guj) 357

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
RAVI R.TRIPATHI and MOHINDER PAL, JJ.
SHREE RAJKOT DISTRICT COOPERATIVE MILK PRODUCERS UNION LTD - Appellant(s)
Versus
BHANUBHAI LABHUBHAI MEHTA & 4 - Respondent(s)
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 973 of 2013 in SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10076 of 2013 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8492 of 2013 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 973 of 2013 With LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1252 of 2013 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10076 of 2013 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11442 of 2013 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1252 of 2013 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12243 of 2013 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 973 of 2013 With LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1347 of 2013 In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11421 of 2013 With CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13350 of 2013 In LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1347 of 2013
Decided on: 11/02/2014

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared
LPA No.973 of 2013:
MR.S.I. NANAVATI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR.NAVIN PAHWA FOR M/S THAKKAR ASSOC., ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR.B.B. NAIK, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR BHARAT T RAO, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 – 3
MR.P.K. JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ASSISTED BY MR.NIRAJ ASHAR, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for respondent no.4.
LPA No.1252 of 2013:
MR.P.K. JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ASSISTED BY MR.NIRAJ ASHAR, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for appellants.
MR.B.B. NAIK, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR BHARAT T RAO, ADVOCATE for the respondents.
LPA No.1347 of 2013 :
MR.S.I. NANAVATI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR.NAVIN PAHWA FOR M/S THAKKAR ASSOC., ADVOCATE for appellant.
MR.P.K. JANI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER ASSISTED BY MR.NIRAJ ASHAR, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for respondent no.1.
MR.B.B. NAIK, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR BHARAT T RAO, ADVOCATE for respondents no.3 – 5.

Headnote:

Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1962, Section 80(2) -- Cancellation of Appointment of Government representative - Educational qualification was not the requirement for appointment nor subjected to any age limit either minimum or maximum - Government representative no longer required in the Co-operative Milk Producer's Union - 'end of pleasure', cancellation of appointment of Govt. representative held proper - No specific attribute like experience in the concerned field was required - Such appointment would be like appointment of Ministers and Attorney General and not to that of Governor - Cancellation of such appointment by invoking pleasure doctrine held proper - Single Judge was wrong in quashing such order - Order of Single Judge, quashed - - Appeal allowed

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)

Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) No.973 of 2013 is filed by Shree Rajkot District Cooperative Milk Producers’ Union Limited being aggrieved by judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application (SCA) No.10076 of 2013 dated 08.07.2013. SCA No.10076 of 2013 was filed by three petitioners, namely, Bhanubhai Labhubhai Mehta, Babubhai Bavanjibhai Nasit and Parshottambhai Keshabhai Savaliya.

2. The learned Single Judge was pleased to pass the following operative order:

“34. For the reasons stated above, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 18.6.2013 is quashed and set aside. The petitioners are held entitled to continue as Government representatives on the Managing Committee of respondent No.3 Sangh on the basis of the order dated 4.3.2013 irrespective of the impugned order dated 18.6.2013. The respondents are directed to permit the petitioners to work and discharge their duties as Government nominees/ representatives on the Managing Committee of respondent No.3 Sangh. Rule is made absolute.

35. At this stage, learned advocate Mr. Pahwa requested to stay and suspend the operation of this judgment and order.

36. The Court having held that the petitioners are entitled to continue as Government representatives cannot accept the request to suspend its judgment and order. Hence, the request of learned advocate Mr. Pahwa is rejected. Direct Service is permitted.”

3. It is against this judgement and order that LPA No.973 of 2013 is filed by the appellant -Shree Rajkot District Cooperative Milk Producers’ Union Limited.

4. LPA No.1252 of 2013 is filed by State of Gujarat, through Secretary, Government of Gujarat, Cooperation Department, along with the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Gujarat State. The judgment under challenge is the same, viz. passed in SCA No.10076 of 2013.

5. LPA No.1347 of 2013 in SCA No.11421 of 2013 is filed by the very same union, viz. Shree Rajkot District Cooperative Milk Producers’ Union Limited being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge in SCA No.11421 of 2013, which was filed by the union (Shree Rajkot District Cooperative Milk Producers’ Union Limited). The learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the petition vide judgment and order dated 04.10.2013, saying, in the operative part of the judgment, as under:

“24. In my view, the petitioner union having not taken any action to challenge the impugned order even after it got report dated 8.1.2013 relied on by respondent no.2 and till after the order dated 18.6.2013 cancelling appointment of respondent No.3 to 5 was set aside by this Court and it having called respondent No.3 to 5 to the meetings of the petitioner society for transacting various businesses in due compliance of the impugned order, the petitioner could be said to have acquiesced in the impugned order.

25. What further appears from the declaration made by the respondent No.3 to 5 that they have been associated with other federation of the cooperative societies and other cooperative societies and they appear to be well connected with the cooperation movements in the District of Rajkot.

26. For the reasons stated above, the Court does not find any merit in the contentions raised by learned advocate Mr. Pahwa for the petitioner. The petition is thus dismissed. Notice is discharged.”

6. As all these three LPAs have common question involved. They are heard together and with the consent of the learned advocates and at their request the matters are taken up for final hearing as this Court [Coram: Vijay Manohar Sahai & K.J. Thaker, JJ.) on 06.01.2014 passed an order, the relevant part of which reads as under:

“On the request made by learned counsel Mr.Rao and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, put up these appeals for admission/ final disposal tomorrow.”

7. The facts giving rise to these appeals are that the petitioners of SCA No.10076 of 2013


























































































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 Back to top