Gujarat High Court Weekly Round Up: May 23 To May 29, 2022

Jaydev Mulubhai Jaju vs State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 177

Hardasbhai Raymalbhai Gohil vs Sanjaybhai Arvindbhai Jabuani 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 178

Shaileshgiri Mohangiri Meghnathi V/S State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 179

Madrasa-E-Anware Rabbani Waqf Committee V/S Surat Municipal Corporation 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 180

Rajendrakumar Manilal Jaiswal V/S State Of Gujarat & 3 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 181

National Insurance Co Ltd V/S Rajeen Rafiqahmed Vohra & 4 Other(S) 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 182

Amitkumar Babubhai Katara V/S The State Of Gujarat 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 183

Sumesh Engineers Private Limited V/S Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 184

Yamuna cables accessories pvt. Ltd. V/s desai enterprise 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 185

State Of Gujarat V Saurashtra Majur Mahajan Sangh 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 186

Orders/Judgment of the Week

Gujarat High Court Permits Provisional Appointment Of Person Claiming Scheduled Tribe Quota Pending Scrutiny Of Caste Certificate

Case Title: Jaydev Mulubhai Jaju vs State Of Gujarat

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 177

The High Court has permitted a person claiming to be from the Scheduled Tribe community, to be provisionally appointed to the post of Sales Tax Inspector Class III, pending scrutiny of the caste certificate produced by him.

Justice Biren Vaishnav directed that such an appointment will be subjected to the result of the Scrutiny Committee. If the certificate produced by the Petitioner is proved to be disingenuous, the Petitioner would not be entitled to the benefit of being in provisional service. Per contra, if the certificate of the Petitioner is found to be genuine, it will be open for the Petitioner to claim his actual appointment along with continuity of service and other benefits.

Mere Delay In Filing FIR Not Fatal In Motor Accident Claims If Adequate Explanation Is Offered: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Hardasbhai Raymalbhai Gohil vs Sanjaybhai Arvindbhai Jabuani

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 178

The High Court directed the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to consider the claim petition filed by a motor accident victim, even though there was a delay of about 1 month in reporting the matter to the Police.

The direction was passed in a First Appeal filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act 1988 challenging dismissal of the claim petition. Attention was drawn to the fact that the victim herein was earning INR 1,50,000 from his agricultural work and therefore the claimants were entitled to get compensation worth INR 11,00,000.

'Pious Stream Of Justice' Must Not Be Polluted: Gujarat High Court Refuses Bail To Lawyer Accused Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust

Case Title: Shaileshgiri Mohangiri Meghnathi V/S State Of Gujarat

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 179

While opining that it is a matter of shame for a lawyer to be involved in serious offences of cheating, criminal breach of trust and criminal intimidation, the Gujarat High Court has refused bail to the Applicant who had allegedly eloped for 3 years with a huge amount of money during the execution of a sale deed.

The Bench comprising Justice Niral R Mehta observed,

"applicant being a lawyer by profession, is oftenly involved in the offence serious in nature which itself is a matter of shame. The profession of a lawyer is a noble profession, as it has direct nexus with pious stream of justice which at any cost shall not be allowed to be polluted. It is highly unexpected from a lawyer to have indulged in such an offence not once, but several times in past. Though some offences are settled, but the fact remains that the offences took place at the instance of the applicant. Thus, the conduct of the applicant seems to be not befitting to the standard of the profession."

Gujarat High Court Refuses To Intervene In Order Declaring Construction Of Madrassa On State Property Illegal

Case Title: Madrasa-E-Anware Rabbani Waqf Committee V/S Surat Municipal Corporation

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 180

The High Court refused to interfere with an order passed by the Executive Engineer of the Surat Municipal Corporation, directing removal of an alleged "Madrassa" said to be constructed on a government land, on the ground that the construction was without prior permission of the competent authority.

"In the opinion of the Court, in absence of any evidence on record regarding actual running of educational institution and there is nothing on record to indicate any permission to running educational institution or building permission to put up construction of educational institution and the factual assertion not being controverted that the premises were being used for commercial purpose, the Court is not inclined to interfere with the ongoing process, which according to the Court is in accordance with the provisions of GDCR," Justice AY Kogje said.

Investigating Officer Can't Change Stand Or Rely On Material Not Forming Part Of Chargesheet To Arraign The Accused: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Rajendrakumar Manilal Jaiswal V/S State Of Gujarat & 3 Other(S)

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 181

While quashing the FIR registered against the Applicant for offences under Sections-66(1)b, 65AE, 116(2), 81, 98 and 99 of the Gujarat Prohibition Act, the High Court has held that it is not open for the Investigating Officer to rely upon other material which was not a part of the chargesheet to allege that the Applicant was involved in the crime in in question.

The Applicant had challenged the FIR since initially he was not named in the FIR but after the investigation his name was included in the charge sheet basis the statements of the co-accused. It was also mentioned in the chargesheet that the Applicant was the principal purchaser of prohibited goods despite there being no material to support the allegations. There was also no evidence that the Applicant had piloted the truck with prohibited goods.

Appeal Filed By Insurance Company 'Unnecessary' Considering 'Smallness Of Amount': Gujarat High Court Upholds Compensation Award Of ₹65,200

Case Title: National Insurance Co Ltd V/S Rajeen Rafiqahmed Vohra & 4 Other(S)

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 182

Stating that the Insurance Company had unnecessarily filed an appeal for challenging a small compensation amount in a motor vehicles accident claim, Justice Sandeep Bhatt has affirmed the award of INR 65, 200 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and dismissed the appeal of the Insurance Company.

The brief facts of the case were that the Claimant (Respondent No. 1) was riding in a rash and negligent manner on a motorcycle with the Opponent No. 2 as a pillion rider when the Opponent No. 4 driving a tempo hit the motorcycle because of excessive speed. This caused serious injuries and fracture to the Claimant. The claim petition was filed to gain compensation worth INR 3 lakhs. However, noting the involvement and liabilities of both parties and the disability claims, the Tribunal declared a compensation of INR 65,200 with 7.5% interest for the Claimant.

Gujarat High Court Denies Bail To Congress Leader Amit Katara Accused Of Conspiring To Murder BJP Councillor Amid Political Rivalry

Case Title: Amitkumar Babubhai Katara V/S The State Of Gujarat

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 183

Opining that there is sufficient evidence to form a prima facie view that the Congress Leader Amit Katara hatched a criminal conspiracy to murder BJP councillor Hiren Patel amid political rivalry, the Gujarat High Court has rejected his bail plea for alleged offences under Sections 302, 303 read with Sections 120(b) and 201 of IPC.

The Bench comprising Justice Ilesh Vora observed,

"The Court should not go into merits of the case by appreciation of the evidence. Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it appears that the applicant was dominating over the municipality affairs as his wife was President and the whole body was representing one party. In this context, when deceased had managed to win over the councilors of the ruling party, naturally, the issue of ruling of municipality would arise. At this stage, considering the material collected during the course of investigation, it cannot be said that there is no evidence connecting the applicant herein in the alleged offence. It is alleged that, the applicant conspired to kill the deceased for which, he agreed to finance also."

Courts Can't Interfere In Contractual Matters Unless A Clear-Cut Case Of Arbitrariness Is Made Out: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: Sumesh Engineers Private Limited V/S Madhya Gujarat Vij Company Limited

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 184

The Gujarat High Court has recently observed that normally, Courts would be loath to interfere in contractual matters unless a clear-cut case of arbitrariness or malafides or bias or irrationality is made out.

A bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Ashutosh Shastri observed that needless interference in commercial matters can cause havoc and hence, the Courts must realize their limitations in such matters.

"But, at the same time, it is also the proposition of law that Constitutional Court being the guardian of the fundamental rights, is duty bound to interfere when there is arbitrariness, irrationality, malafides and bias and as such, a duty is cast upon the Court in such circumstances that whenever any specific arbitrariness or irrationality is visible in public interest, Court can exercise powers of judicial review," it added.

Pre-Deposit Of 75% Of Awarded Amount As Per S.19 Of MSMED Act Can Be Made In Installments: Gujarat High Court

Case Title: yamuna cables accessories pvt. Ltd. V/s desai enterprise

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 185

The High Court permitted a party in appeal under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 to make a pre-deposit to Court in terms of Section 19 of the Act, i.e., 75% of the amount awarded, in installments.

The Petitioner herein was aggrieved by an order of Additional District Judge, whereby its application for extension of time to deposit the 75% of the award amount was rejected.

Gujarat HC Affirms Regularisation Of Sweeper Working Around 8 Hours A Day For Over 30 Years

Case Title : State Of Gujarat V Saurashtra Majur Mahajan Sangh

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 186

Justice Biren Vaishnav affirmed the order of the Industrial Tribunal which directed the Petitioner-State authorities to regularise the position of a sweeper who had been working for over four hours everyday for the past thirty years. The Tribunal had directed that the State also remit all the arrears from the date of reinstatement given the length of the worker's tenure.

Other updates from the High Court

Employee Transferred To 'Unknown Location' In Arunachal Pradesh From University Campus In Gandhinagar: Gujarat High Court Issues Notice

Case Title: Kundankumar Hasmukhbhai Parmar V/S Rashtriya Raksha University

The High Court has issued notice to the Rashtriya Raksga University on a plea moved by its Chief Accounts Officer (Class-I), challenging a communication which directs his transfer from the University's Gandhinagar campus to an upcoming campus at an 'unknown location' in Arunachal Pradesh.

The employee, claiming to be working on a 'permanent' and 'sanctioned' post has stated that the new location is 3,000+ kilometers away from the University's sole Lavad-Dehgam campus in Gandhinagar and he is the only employee amongst 233 employees to be transferred to such a location. The purported motivation behind such transfer order is that the Petitioner continues to raise his voice against alleged illegalities and irregularities committed by the University's Vice Chancellor.