CHANDRASINH GOKALSINH VAGHELA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A grievance which is voiced in the present application was deliberate and willful disobedience of the judgment and order passed in Special Civil Application No. 3355 of 2013 by the concerned respondents, more particularly, respondent no. 4 ­ Agricultural Produce Market Committee (APMC), Petlad and consequently to punish the concerned respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act.

(2.) In response to the notice issued by this Court, Shri Umesh Trivedi, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 4 ­ APMC, Petlad. An affidavitinreply is filed on behalf of respondent no. 4 ­ APMC, Petlad. It appears that there was a dispute interse between APMC, Petlad and APMC, Borsad. The learned Single Judge of this Court directed APMC, Petlad to pay arrears, revised payscales etc., It is reported that against the order passed in the aforesaid Special Civil Application No. 3355 of 2013, respondent no. 4 ­ APMC. Petlad preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 1171 of 2014 and other Letters Patent Appeals and by judgment and order dated 13.11.2014, the Division Bench dismissed the said Letters Patent Appeal No. 1171 of 2014 and others by modifying the order to the extent of awarding interest @ 12% per annum and it is modified to 8% per annum. It is reported that the Division Bench has granted three months time from 13.11.2014 to respondent no. 4 ­ APMC, Petlad to comply with the order passed by the learned Single Judge passed in aforesaid Special Civil Application No. 3355 of 2013. However, interest to be paid @ 8% per annum.

(3.) Today, when the present application is taken up for further hearing, Shri Umesh Trivedi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 4 ­ APMC, Petlad has stated in the affidavitin reply that the total outstanding amount required to be paid to the applicants comes to Rs.37,93,712/ calculated as on 30.11.2014. It is stated that the balance amount shall be paid to the concerned employees as soon as the funds are arranged, but not later than the time permitted by the Hon'ble High Court as ordered in Letters Patent Appeal No. 1171 of 2014 and others. Therefore, it is requested to accept the unconditional apology tendered on behalf of respondent no. 4 ­ APMC, Petlad and close the present proceedings.