Handled a contempt application alleging violation of transfer directions. Noted that despite delays, transfer was eventually effectuated. Held that deliberate violation was not proved and disposed of the application as not a fit case for further proceedings.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
C/MCA/478/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 478 of 2018
In SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15529 of 2016
========================================================== JAGRUTIBEN JERAMBHAI TANDEL
Versus B J BRAHMBHATT STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS SHILPA R SHAH(796) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 MR DM DEVNANI, AGP (1) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,2 MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 4 NOTICE SERVED(4) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
Date : 03/07/2018
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY)
1.This Miscellaneous Civil Application is
filed under the provisions of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971 alleging that the respondents
have violated the directions issued in the order
dated 13.12.2017 passed in Special Civil
Application No.15529 of 2016.
2.In the Special Civil Application, the
petitioner was seeking the benefit of Government
Resolution dated 22.5.1997 and was claiming
transfer of her services as Vidya Sahayak from
Dahod to Navsari district. The Special Civil
Page 1 of 3
C/MCA/478/2018 ORDER
Application was allowed by order dated 13.12.2017
directing the respondents to transfer the
petitioner to nearest place of her native-
Navsari by extending the benefit of the
resolution/circular dated 22.5.1997.
3.We have heard learned counsel for the
applicant and also learned Assistant Government
Pleader appearing for the respondents and learned
counsel Shri Munshaw appearing for the fourth
respondent-District Primary Education Officer.
Though it is contended by the learned counsel for
the applicant that inspite of specific direction
for effecting transfer within a particular time,
the respondents have willfully and deliberately
disobeyed the orders. Further, at the same time,
it is not disputed that during the pendency of
this Miscellaneous Civil Application, she was
transferred and she is also allowed to join
Navsari. In view of the contention of the learned
counsel for the applicant that there is a delay,
we have gone through the reply affidavit filed in
this application on 27.3.2018 filed on behalf of
the District Primary Officer. Further, learned
counsel Shri Munshaw has submitted that in view
of the pendency of the Letters Patent Appeal and
further orders passed in the said appeal, the
respondents have moved the competent authority
who has issued orders dated 15.6.2018 for
Page 2 of 3
C/MCA/478/2018 ORDER
permitting the transfer of the services of the
applicant from Dahod to Navsari and after the
said order was communicated to the Director of
Education on 21.6.2018, she was relieved from
Dahod on 23.6.2018.
4.It is true that there was some delay
from time to time in implementing the directions
by this Court but having regard to the steps
taken by the respondents, we are of the view that
it cannot be said that the respondents have
deliberately and willfully violated the
directions issued by this Court. In that view of
the matter, we are of the view that this is not a
fit case to proceed further. But, at the same
time, we are constrained to observe that whenever
there are directions issued by this Court, the
respondents to take steps immediately without
losing any time. Subject to above, this
Miscellaneous Civil Application is disposed off.
(R.SUBHASH REDDY, CJ)
(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)
SRILATHA
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondents deliberately and willfully violated the Supreme Court's directions regarding transfer of services.
Whether the Miscellaneous Civil Application is a fit case to proceed further in light of steps taken by the respondents.
Jagruben Jerambhai Tandel
B J Brahmbhatt
State of Gujarat
District Primary Education Officer
R. Subhash Reddy
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court