PATEL SOMABHAI KACHARDAS Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Mr.Prachchak, learned A.G.P. appears for respondent Nos.1 and 2 waives notice of rule. With the consent of the parties, all the matters are taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) The short facts of the case are that the petitioner was the member of Kalol Municipality for the period of 1996, 1997 and others. It appears that the Director of Municipality initiated the proceedings under Section 70 of the Gujarat Municipality Act,(hereinafter referred to as the "Act") for fastening of the financial liability for misuse and irregularities committed by the office bearers of the Municipality. Ultimately, different orders came to be passed by the Director of Municipality under Section 70 of the Act whereby, the proportionate financial liability was fastened upon the concerned member of the Municipality including the petitioner herein and the said amounts were ordered to be recovered. It appears that the petitioner preferred an appeal before the learned District Judge, as per Section 70 (4) of the Act. However, such appeal was required to be preferred within period of one month from the date of the said decision. But, as there was a delay of 12 days in preferring the appeal, the application for condonation of delay was also preferred by the petitioner in the concerned appeal. It appears that the said application for condonation of delay remained pending for long time and when it came up for hearing before the learned District Judge at Gandhinagar, nobody remained present on behalf of the petitioner and the learned District Judge found that the appellant/applicant therein was no longer interested, in conducting the appeal and therefore, the applications were dismissed for default, as per the order dated 14/10/2004. Under these circumstances, the petitioners have preferred the present petition before this Court.

(3.) Special Civil Application No.856/2005 is preferred for challenging the order passed in Misc. Civil Application No.51/2004 and S.C.A. No.857/2004 is preferred for challenging the very common order passed in Civil Misc. Application No.52/2004, S.C.A. No.858/2005 is preferred for challenging the same type of order passed in Civil Misc. Application No.54/2004 and S.C.A.No.859/2005 is preferred for challenging the common order passed in Civil Misc. Application No.53/2004. As there are two common orders for two sets of Civil Misc. Applications and the reasons recorded in both the orders are common and the facts are also common, they shall be considered in common for examining the merits of the order.