Gujarat High Court
Rajendrakumar Dayashankar Gupta vs State Of Gujarat on 24 July, 2019
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
C/SCA/12394/2019 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12394 of 2019
===========================================================
RAJENDRAKUMAR DAYASHANKAR GUPTA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
================================================================
Appearance:
MR NISHANT LALAKIYA(5511) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
MR.SAMEER H LALAKIYA(7250) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,10,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99) for
the Respondent(s) No. 1
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 24/07/2019
ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioners are agitating before this Court a dispute wherein the petitioners though original residents of Hutment named as 'Sanjaynagar' on Revenue Survey No.41 of Village Sama, Vadodara, under the Rehabilitation Scheme have not been allotted a dwelling unit in the PMAY Scheme which is now completed at a location behind Agora Mall, Mangal Pandey Road, Village Sama, Vadodara.
2. During the course of arguments, it has come to the Notice of the Court that the family members of the petitioners have already been alloted a dwelling unit under the Scheme and therefore, prima- facie the benefit of Scheme being available to family as one unit, the allotment to the petitioners was not made. However, learned Advocate for the petitioners has brought to the notice of this Court, instances where other occupiers of the dwelling units / independent units in the Scheme are also given to the members of the same family and therefore, as the case of the petitioners is also Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 25 03:08:51 IST 2019 C/SCA/12394/2019 ORDER on the same line, it should be considered by the authority.
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that on several occasions, the petitioners have made a representation before the authorities, for allotting of the dwelling units which are still vacant. According to the petitioners, at the time of representation, 30 dwelling units were still vacant and were available of which now four have been recently allotted and therefore, 26 dwelling units are still vacant.
4. Learned Advocate for the petitioners is ready and willing to make a detailed representation to the authorities to bring to the notice that identically situated other persons from the same family have been allotted independent dwelling units, considering the fact that earlier also such family members were occupying separate independent dwelling units in the slum which had existed prior to the Scheme.
5. In view of the aforesaid, it is open for the petitioners to make a representation within a period of two weeks from today with the aforesaid details. The authorities shall consider the representation on the documents that may be furnished and grant an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Such a a decision be taken within a period of four months from the date of receipt of writ of the order of this Court and till such a decision is taken, further allotment of 26 vacant dwelling units may not be proceeded with.
6. With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of. Direct Service is permitted.
Sd/-
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) CAROLINE Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Thu Jul 25 03:08:51 IST 2019