KIRITBHAI GANGARAM SOLANKI Vs. PRASHANT K. PARIKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocates for the parties. The petitioner has by way of this petition approached this Court invoking provisions of Contempt of Court's Act with following prayers.

(2.) The facts in brief, as could be gathered from the memo and the annexures would indicate that the petitioner at the relevant time had moved the concerned Collector for seeking redressal in respect of the orders passed by the Nadiad Nagar Palika in which without following the procedure of law or in ignorance of the relevant rules, it would alleged that the promotions and appointments were made. This resolution of Nagarpalika were subject matter of scrutiny by the concerned District Collector, who issued order under Section - 258 (3) of the Municipality Act, which is said to be assailed by those, who are affected, by way of Special Civil Application No.10751 of 1996, in which this Court vide order dated 23rd July 1999 observed that the Collector's order was not required to be interfered with in any manner, as in case if the Collector's orders were not quashed and set aside, it would amount to perpetuating the illegalities, which were quashed and set aside by the Collector, as two orders of Nagarpalika were stayed. Hence, the petition was dismissed. It would be most appropriate to set out the observations of the learned Single Judge and the final order from the order dated 23rd July 1999, which reads as under :

(3.) This order of learned Single Judge dated 23rd July 1999 was assailed in the L.P.A. being L.P.A. No.1089 of 1999 in which this Court concurring with the findings recorded by the learned Single Judge, rejected the appeal. However, it was further required to be observed by the Court that the protection was granted to the appellants, who were 11 in number by the order of maintaining status quo, therefore the Court had made observations. The observations of the Court in the order dated 29th Jan. 2014 in the L.P.A. No.1089 of 1999 deserved to be set out as under :"