PATEL VALJI RAMJI VAKARIA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) xxx xxx xxx.

(2.) So far as the impugned order at Annexure-G to this petition is concerned, it cannot be sustained in law for a moment in view of the binding ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Gujarat v. Patel Raghav Natha reported in (1969) 10 Gujarat Law Reporter at page 992 and the binding Division Bench ruling of this Court in the case of Bhagwanji Bawanji Patel v. State of Gujarat reported in (1971) 12 Gujarat Law Reporter at page 156. It has been held by the Supreme Court in its aforesaid binding ruling that powers under Section 211 of the Code qua the N. A. Permission have to be exercised within the reasonable period of three months from the date of the N.A. Permission order. In its aforesaid Division Bench ruling, this Court has held that, in any case, the revisional powers under the aforesaid statutory provision have to be exercised within the reasonable period of one year. Both the aforesaid rulings are binding to this Court

(3.) Both the aforesaid rulings are on all fours applicable in the case represented by the First Petition. The N. A Permission order at Annexure-A thereto was passed as early as on 30th January 1984. The show-cause notice for its revision was issued earlier on 30th May 1986, more than two years after the date of the order and subsequently on 11th January 1989, nearly five years from the date of the order. Such revisional powers for revising the N. A. Permission order after such a long time could not have been exercised in view of the aforesaid binding rulings of the Supreme Court and this Court The impugned order at Annexure-G to the First Petition cannot therefore be sustained in law and it has to be quashed and set aside.