Gujarat High Court
SCA/8502/1997 of NAROL TEXTILE PROCESSORS ASSOCIATION Vs STATE OF GUJARAT on 1 December 1997
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8502 of 1997 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and MR.JUSTICE S.M.SONI ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements? 2.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 8502 of 1997
For Approval and Signature:
Hon'ble MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and
MR.JUSTICE S.M.SONI
============================================================
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
-------------------------------------------------------------- NAROL TEXTILE PROCESSORS ASSOCIATION
Versus STATE OF GUJARAT
-------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance:
MR PARESH M DAVE for Petitioner
-------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MR.JUSTICE B.C.PATEL and MR.JUSTICE S.M.SONI
Date of decision: 01/12/97
ORAL JUDGEMENT
The petitioner, which is a registered entity under the Non-Trading Corporation Act, has approached this Court. The petitioner is desirous of constructing a CETP for the process houses of Narol area. The petitioner wants assistance from this Court for sanction, approval and consent of the CETP. On questioning, it is clear that the Association has not approached till this date to any authority for the proposed work in question. If the petitioner has approached the competent authorities who are required to take a decision in the matter and the authorities have refused the permission, the matter would stand on a different footing. Thus, the petition is premature, and therefore, is required to be rejected. The petition is rejected. csm./���-----------