1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2010
  6. /
  7. January

Godavaribenjayantilalprajapati vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|07 May, 2010
GODAVARIBENJAYANTILALPRAJAPATI,MEMBER,EXECUTIVECOMMITTEE & 3 - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT, THROUGH SECRETARY & 3 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance :
MR PR NANAVATI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 4.MR BS KHATANA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 4. MS MONALI BHATT, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 4. DS AFF.NOT FILED (R) for Respondent(s) : 1 -
4. ========================================================= CORAM :
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE J.C.UPADHYAYA Date : 07/05/2010 ORAL COMMON ORDER (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BHAGWATI PRASAD) Heard learned counsel for the parties. Admittedly the purport of Section 67 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') is to the effect that as and when a work is undertaken by the Local Body, before entering into any contract for execution of any work or the supply of any materials or goods which would involve an expenditure exceeding Rs.5000/-, then it is necessary to give notice by advertisement in a newspaper, inviting tenders for such contract. Therefore, this is the plain meaning of Section 67 of the Act and, therefore, the opinion of the learned Single Judge that this requires to be interpreted in this fashion only, is not considered in any way against the principles of interpretation. As regards the case cited by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.9289 of 2008 preferred by Kiritlal Ratilal Shah & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat & Ors., the learned Single Judge has broadly proceeded on the premise that the expenditure involved was less than Rs.5000/- and in that view of the matter, if any observation have been made, then they cannot mean that the purport of Section 67 is otherwise held. In that view of the matter, the reference is accordingly answered and the opinion of the learned Single Judge making reference is held to be correct. The matters may be placed before the learned Single Judge for disposal in accordance with law.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.