SCA/410919/1999 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4109 of 1999 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 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 the 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 ? ========================================================= TATA CHEMICALS LIMITED - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SHIRISH JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, MS REETA CHANDARANA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, RULE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1, 3, MR PV HATHI for Respondent(s) : 2, DELETED for Respondent(s) : 4, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 10/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT After some discussion at the bar, learned advocates appearing for the parties agree that the SCA/410919/1999 2/3 JUDGMENT present proceedings can be remanded before the Government for fresh consideration in accordance with law since no effective opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioner before the Government dismissed the revision application of the petitioner by the impugned order produced at Annexure 'L' to the petition. 2. On 17.8.07, learned single Judge of this Court recorded the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order was passed while settlement talks were going on between the parties and was without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Learned AGP was granted time to take instructions on this aspect of the matter. 3. Today in response to the said development, learned AGP Ms.Chandarana placed on record a communication dated 1.9.07 received by the Government Pleader from the Government stating that the Government would be agreeable to give personal hearing to the representative of the petitioner. 4. Learned advocate Shri Joshi submitted that settlement talks were going on between the petitioner and the Panchayat and at that stage the order Annexure L came to be passed without effective hearing of the revision application. 5. Learned advocate Shri D.K.Mehta for Shri Hathi for the Panchayat submitted that to bring an early SCA/410919/1999 3/3 JUDGMENT end to the dispute, time limit for passing fresh order by the Government may be provided. 6. Under the circumstances, the impugned order Annexure L is set aside and the matter is remanded. The Secretary concerned would give hearing to the petitioner as well as the representative of the Panchayat and pass fresh order in accordance with law. The same may be done preferably within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. I have expressed no opinion on the rival contentions on the legality of the demand under challenge. All contentions kept open. It is further clarified that until the Secretary passes fresh order, the present mechanism for collecting the water charges shall continue to operate between the parties. 7. The petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. (Akil Kureshi, J.) (vjn)