Shantaben Rameshbhai Rathodiya vs State Of Gujarat
2021 Latest Caselaw 5731 Guj

      C/LPA/475/2020                                    ORDER DATED: 09/06/2021




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 475 of 2020
            In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8203 of 2020
                                 With
               CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2020
              In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 475 of 2020
==========================================================
                       SHANTABEN RAMESHBHAI RATHODIYA
                                    Versus
                              STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR DARSHAN B GANDHI(9771) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MS NISHA THAKORE, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent No. 1
MR HS MUNSHAW(495) for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK(3) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 10,5,6,7,8,9
==========================================================

 CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH
        and
        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV

                           Date : 09/06/2021
                            ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE VIKRAM NATH)

1. We have heard Shri S.P.Majmudar, learned

counsel for the appellant, Ms.Nisha Thakore, learned

Assistant Government Pleader for the State

respondents and Shri H.S.Munshaw, learned counsel

appearing for respondents Nos.3 and 4.

2. The present Letters Patent Appeal under

Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been preferred

assailing the correctness of the judgment and order

C/LPA/475/2020 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2021

dated 18.08.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge

in Special Civil Application No.8203 of 2020 filed by

the present appellant whereby the petition was

dismissed.

3. The present appellant was an elected

Sarpanch, however, a No Confidence Motion was passed

against her on 25.06.2020. She challenged the said No

Confidence Motion on two grounds. Firstly on

malafides and secondly that she was not afforded due

opportunity to speak at the time of deliberations.

The learned Single Judge rejected both the

contentions. The first contention of malafide on the

ground that the same could not be examined and in a

democratic set up where deliberations have taken

place and the motion has been passed by way of the

majority, the neat questions of malice could not

arise. The second ground regarding opportunity to

speak, the learned Single Judge recorded that the

petitioner failed to show that she asserted and

requested to speak but she was not allowed to speak,

that being not so, the petitioner cannot allege that

she was not afforded any opportunity.

C/LPA/475/2020 ORDER DATED: 09/06/2021

4. The respondents have annexed a judgment of

the Division Bench dated 31.08.2018 passed in Letters

Patent Appeal No.1135 of 2018 wherein similar issue

raised has been decided against the present appellant

in paragraph 12.1 thereof. In that view of the

matter, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment

and order of the learned Single Judge warranting

interference in appeal.

5. The appeal lacks merit and is accordingly

dismissed. Consequently, the connected Civil

Application stands disposed of.

(VIKRAM NATH, CJ)

(BIREN VAISHNAV, J) GAURAV J THAKER