Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

Jitenrakumar Ishwarlal Modi vs N R Dhadhal on 20 March, 2025

                                                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION




                               C/SCA/8789/2023                                    ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025

                                                                                                                 undefined




                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                        R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8789 of 2023

                        ==========================================================
                                                      JITENRAKUMAR ISHWARLAL MODI
                                                                   Versus
                                                            N R DHADHAL & ORS.
                        ==========================================================
                        Appearance:
                        MR PRAGNESHKUMAR J MODI(10005) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                        MR YH MOTIRAMANI(3720) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
                        MS ROSHNI PATEL, LD.ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
                        Respondent(s) No. 3
                        MR DHVALKUMAR R PRAJAPATI(12251) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
                        MR. VISHRUT R JANI(6696) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
                        ==========================================================

                           CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT

                                                             Date : 20/03/2025

                                                              ORAL ORDER

1. This petition is filed seeking to quash and set aside the order dated 17.04.2023 under which the order of seal for the property of respondent No.4 was kept in abeyance.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Y.H.Motiramani for the petitioner, learned advocate Mr.Vishrut Jani for respondent Nos.1 and 2; learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Roshni Patel for respondent No.3 and learned advocate Mr.Dhaval Prajapati for respondent No.4.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Y.H.Motiramani for the petitioner submitted that for the unauthorised construction carried out by Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Mar 22 00:50:01 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8789/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined respondent No.4, the petitioner made representation/complaint before respondent Nos.1 and 2 authorities. Pursuant to the said representation/complaint, action was initiated and an order dated 01.04.2023 (Annexure "A") was passed by respondent No.1 intending to seal the premises of respondent No.4. However, the said order was kept in abeyance by the order dated 17.04.2023 (Annexure "B"), on the ground that respondent No.4 has preferred an application seeking regularisation of unauthorised construction under the provisions of the Gujarat Regularisation of Unauthorised Development Act- 2022 (hereinafter referred to as "GRUDA-2022"). The said application came to be rejected by an order dated 31.07.2023. Therefore, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are duty bound to act upon the order dated 01.04.2023 and to take appropriate action for removal of unauthorised construction. Therefore, direction may be issued to respondent Nos.1 and 2 to take appropriate action.

4. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Vishrut Jani for respondent Nos.1 and 2 submitted that against the order dated 31.07.2023 rejecting application of respondent No.4 seeking regularisation of unauthorised construction, an appeal was preferred. Therefore, after ascertaining the outcome of appeal appropriate action will be taken in accordance with law.

NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8789/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined

5. Learned advocate Mr.Dhaval Prajapati for respondent No.4 submitted that against the order dated 31.07.2023 rejecting the application seeking regularisation of unauthorised construction, respondent No.4 has preferred an appeal and the same is pending. Moreover, the petitioner has filed this petition despite there being Memorandum of Understanding between the petitioner and respondent No.4 and therefore the petition being misconceived deserves to be rejected.

6. Considered the submissions. From the facts, it is noticed that for alleged unauthorised construction by respondent No.4, the petitioner had preferred representation/ complaint before respondent Nos.1 and 2 authorities. Taking cognizance of the same, respondent No.1 had passed an order dated 01.04.2023 intending to seal the premises of respondent No.4. However, the order dated 01.04.2023 was kept in abeyance on account of pendency of the application seeking regularisation of unauthorised construction filed by respondent No.4 under GRUDA-2022. Now, the said application is decided by an order dated 31.07.2023 and by which application seeking regularisation of unauthorised construction was rejected. Against the order dated 31.07.2023, an appeal is provided under the provisions of GRUDA -2o22. Respondent No.4 had preferred the appeal and the same is pending. The contention of Memorandum of Understanding entered into between the Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by DIPTI PATEL(HC00191) on Fri Mar 21 2025 Downloaded on : Sat Mar 22 00:50:01 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8789/2023 ORDER DATED: 20/03/2025 undefined petitioner and respondent No.4, is of no consequences for alleged illegal construction. Since the appeal was preferred by respondent No.4 against the order dated 31.07.2023 and the same is pending, respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to take appropriate action if so required, in accordance with law, after the appeal is decided. With the above observation, this petition is disposed of. Notice is discharged.

Direct service is permitted.

(MAUNA M. BHATT,J) DIPTI PATEL...