Gujarat High Court
MCACP/826/1989 of JILLA KAMDAR SANGH Vs SURENDRANAGAR DIST. PANCHAYAT on 8 November 1995
OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NOS.826/89, 827/89, 828/89 and 1148/89 ------- Date of decision:8.11.1995. For approval and signature The Honourable Mr. Justice S.M. Soni and The Honourable Mr.Justice R.R.Jain 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NOS.826/89, 827/89, 828/89 and 1148/89
��-------
Date of decision:8.11.1995.
For approval and signature
The Honourable Mr. Justice S.M. Soni
and
The Honourable Mr.Justice R.R.Jain
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 judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not?
3. Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of judgment?
4. Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder?
5. Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge?
���Coram:S.M.Soni & R.R. Jain,JJ.
���-----------------------------
���November 8, 1995.
Common Oral judgment (Per Soni, J)
As common question of law is involved in all these petitions, they are disposed of by this common judgment Petitioner has filed this application for taking necessary action under the Contempt of Courts Act alleging that respondents have not complied with the award passed by the Labour Court. In view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of the Alahar Co-operative Credit Service Society v. Sham Lal, reported in 1995 (2) G.L.H. 550, Labour Court is not a court subordinate to High Court as contemplated under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act. Hence, this petition is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs.