THE SINDHU RESETTLEMENT CORPORATION LTD.versusPREM SOBHRAJMAL LALWANI

      C/MCA/1549/2026                              ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

      R/MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR RECALL) NO. 1549 of 2026

                In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION/5145/2026

==================================================
                THE SINDHU RESETTLEMENT CORPORATION LTD.
                                  Versus
                      PREM SOBHRAJMAL LALWANI & ORS.
==================================================
Appearance:
MR PRAKASH JANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR. ARCHIT P JANI(7304) for
the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR SKUND PATHAK FOR AISHVARYA(8018) for the Opponent(s) No. 4
MS JYOTI BHATT, ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s) No. 7
MR NIRAV R MISHRA(6140) for the Opponent(s) No. 1
MR PRADIP D BHATE(1523) for the Opponent(s) No. 6
MR SHUSHIL R SHUKLA(5603) for the Opponent(s) No. 2,3
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 5
==================================================

     CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK

                            Date : 17/08/2026

                                    ORDER


1.     Present application is 7led by the applicant (original respondent
No.4) seeking following reliefs :

       “(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to recall of the order dated
       10.04.2026 passed by this Hon’ble Court in Special Civil Application
       no.5145 of 2026;

       (B) Pending admission, hearing and +nal disposal of the present
       application, your lordship may be pleased to stay the operation,
       execution and implementation of the order dated 10.04.2026 passed
       in Special Civil Application no.5145 of 2026;

       (C) Your Lordships may be pleased to grant such other and further
       relief/s and/or order as deemed +t in the facts and circumstances of
       the case in favour of the Applicants, in the interest of justice.”



                                    Page 1 of 6
     C/MCA/1549/2026                                 ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




2.    The present application has been 7led by The Sindhu
Resettlement Corporation Ltd. (original respondent no.4) seeking
recall of the order dated 10.04.2026 passed by this Court in Special
Civil Application No. 5145/2026, whereby the respondent authorities
were directed to decide the representation dated 21.11.2025
submitted by the original petitioner. The applicant contends that the
said order was obtained by suppression of material facts, non-joinder
of necessary parties, and on the basis of incomplete and misleading
factual aspects. It is the case of the applicant that the original
petitioner (respondent No.1 herein) served as a Director of the
applicant-Corporation for more than 30 years (from 1995) and after
his panel lost the election in September, 2025 and his resignation
withdrawal was rejected by the Board, he started making frivolous
representations. That, the petitioner has no locus standi and the
allegations are vague in general and politically motivated, the
necessary parties (including Gandhidham Development Authority,
Banks, and Plot Owners) have not been joined, and the representation
had already        been responded    to       vide communications dated
04.12.2025 and 24.04.2026. In view of the material suppression and
abuse of process, the applicant invokes the inherent powers of this
Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and Section 151 of
the CPC to recall the order dated 10.04.2026 in the interest of justice.


3.    Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties.


4.    Mr.Prakash Jani, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of
the applicant – Corporation, has submitted that the petition 7led by
the petitioner would not be maintainable as none of the legal or
fundamental right of the petitioner is violated. It is submitted that the


                                Page 2 of 6
      C/MCA/1549/2026                            ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




petitioner was appointed as Director in the Applicant-Corporation
w.e.f. 1995 (enclosed as Annexure-II) and till the year 2025, there was
no any complaint 7led by the Petitioner and after the defeat in the
election and resigning from Director, the petitioner started making
representations to the authorities alleging purported illegalities or
irregularities which undisputedly occurred during the tenure of the
petitioner as Director and in-charge Chairman and, therefore, the
petitioner would be estopped from raising any allegation in
representation to the issues which were approved by the petitioner
and the petition is also required to be rejected on the ground of delay
and laches. It is further submitted that the petitioner has not joined
necessary and proper parties viz., Gandhidham Development
Authority, Mr Lalit Vidhani, Banks and plot owners who would be
necessary and proper parties and if the process is initiated by the
authorities, these persons would be directly aHected and hence, they
are necessary and proper parties who ought to have been joined.
These aHected parties have not been joined by the petitioner
deliberately in the petition.


4.1    Mr.Jani, learned senior counsel has submitted that there is
suppression of material facts as the panel set up by the petitioner lost
election, including son of the petitioner and therefore, the petitioner
had tendered resignation from his post as Director. However, the said
resignation was withdrawn later by the petitioner but was not
accepted by the Board of the applicant and it was because of that, the
petitioner had started addressing numerous representations making
frivolous allegations. It is submitted that the petitioner has made
vague and general allegations in the representations made by him
and the petitioner is no more in the oIce of the applicant and hence,
the petitioner has no locus standi. It is submitted that the petitioner


                                Page 3 of 6
      C/MCA/1549/2026                           ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




has not made any representation during his tenure as Director for
more than 30 years and in-charge chairman for 2.5 years and the
petition was 7led with mala7de intention to create harassment to the
members and newly elected Board as the panel set up by the
petitioner had lost in the election held of eight members of the
applicant in the month of September, 2025, wherein the son of the
petitioner had also contested and lost. It is submitted that the defeat
faced by panel set up by the petitioner resulted in resignation of the
petitioner from the post of Director and the resignation tendered by
the petitioner was later on withdrawn as the petitioner desperately
wanted to continue as Director. However, the withdrawal of
resignation as Director was not accepted by the Board and therefore,
the petitioner had gone out from the Board of the applicant. The
defeat in the election and ouster from both of the applicant, resulted
in acrimony and sense of vengeance and therefore, the petitioner had
started making representations to the past decisions of the applicant.


4.2       Mr.Jani, learned senior counsel has submitted that the
petitioner has 7led three petitions immediately after making the
representation seeking innocuous relief to decide representation,
wherein this Court has passed orders in two writ petitions, whereas, in
the third writ petition, the notice was issued and the matter is
pending i.e. Special Civil Application no.5181 of 2026. It is submitted
that the petitioner has, therefore, made personal allegations against
Mr.Lalit Vidhani, the Director and Dy. Chairman of the applicant-
Corporation without even joining him as a Party Respondent. It is
submitted that, despite the present applicant -original respondent
No.4 having been joined as a party respondent, without issuance of
notice to the applicant, the Court issued the necessary directions as
referred to in paragraph 7 of the impugned order and by virtue of the


                               Page 4 of 6
     C/MCA/1549/2026                               ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




impugned order and the directions contained therein, the applicant is
directly aHected and therefore, the applicant has preferred the
present application seeking recall of the order dated 10.04.2026
passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 5145 of 2026.


5.    On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respective
respondents have opposed the present application and submitted that
the present application for review / recall is not maintainable and
there is no error committed by this Court in passing the impugned
order. It is submitted that the Court has considered the submissions of
both the sides, and thus, there is no any error or any illegality
committed by this Court while passing the impugned order and
therefore, the present application be dismissed.


6.    I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective
parties and perused the material placed on record. While passing the
order dated 10.04.2026, this Court, despite the present applicant -
original respondent No.4 having been joined as a party respondent,
without issuance of notice to the applicant, the Court issued the
necessary directions as referred to in paragraph 7 of the impugned
order. The applicant has submitted that, by virtue of the impugned
order and the directions contained therein, the applicant is directly
aHected. In view of the submissions made and the facts stated in the
application, and in light of the observations made in paragraph 7 of
the impugned order, it is further directed that the concerned
authorities, more particularly, original respondent Nos. 1 and 2, shall
decide the issue after aHording a proper and reasonable opportunity
of hearing to all the concerned parties, including the present applicant
- original respondent No.4, within a period of one month from the date
of receipt of this order, in accordance with law. If any of the


                                Page 5 of 6
             C/MCA/1549/2026                                                          ORDER DATED: 17/08/2026




     concerned parties wish to make written submissions, they shall be at
     liberty to do so, and the same shall be duly considered by the
     concerned authorities.


     7.         With the above observations and directions, the present
     application stands disposed of. However, it is observed that this Court
     has not entered into the merits of the matter.



                                                                         (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)

     Dolly




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: DOLLYBEN CHETANBHAI VADUKAR(HC01392), PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 18/08/2026 17:38:38



                                                          Page 6 of 6