Gujarat High Court
Maheshbhai Keshavlal Patel & 13 vs Deputy Collector & 8....Opponent(S) on 30 July, 2015
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi
C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 87 of 2014
================================================================
MAHESHBHAI KESHAVLAL PATEL & 13....Applicant(s)
Versus
DEPUTY COLLECTOR & 8....Opponent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MS MEGHA JANI, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 - 14
MR RITURAJ M MEENA, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 9
MR.J S SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 3 , 6 - 8
NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 1 - 2 , 4 - 5
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date : 30/07/2015
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties for final disposal of the petition. This Revision Petition is filed by the residents of Sardardham Society at GIDC, Dediyasan. They have challenged an order dated 05.06.2013 passed by the Mamlatdar, Mehsana as confirmed by an order dated 21.02.2014 by the Assistant Collector, Mahesana. Such proceedings were instituted by landholders of various agriculture lands situated in the vicinity under Section 5 of the Mamlatdars Courts Act. They complained of the GIDC and the occupants of having blocked the access to their agriculture lands. They therefore requested Mamlatdar to remove such obstruction. Page 1 of 7 C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER By the impugned order, Mamlatdar granted such request. Assistant Collector rejected the revision of the GIDC.
2. At that stage, the present petitioners got involved in the litigation. Their case is that the GIDC has acquired various private lands for public purpose at Dediyasan. Part of the acquired lands was developed into industrial plots. One part is developed into residential colony. The present petitioners are occupants of such residential plots on which they have also put up their residential units.
3. Before the Mamlatdar, the case of the plaintiffs was that their agriculture lands are situated adjacent to the GIDC Estate, Dediyasan. Part of the GIDC Estate used to be a 'naliya'-a Government public road, which the GIDC has now completely covered through various plots in its layout. According to the plaintiffs, the Government never allotted such land to GIDC. GIDC therefore had no authority in law to occupy such land. Through such unauthorized and illegal occupation, GIDC, in fact, deprived residents of locality their access through such 'naliya'. The plaintiffs further contended that in view of such a passage through 'naliya', GIDC used to permit the neighbouring agriculturists access through its internal roads in the Estate. However, shortly before filing the proceedings before the Page 2 of 7 C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER Mamlatdar, some unknown persons had put up gates and closed such gates, which resulted into the users of the roads for their passage being deprived of such use. Mamlatdar accepted such stand and Assistant Collector also found no reason to interfere.
4. The present petitioners contend that the entire proceedings before the Mamlatdar and Assistant Collector proceeded without hearing them. As residents of the locality, they had a right to be heard. The adverse effect of the order of the Mamlatdar would immediately be felt by them. They further point out that the plaintiffs before the Mamlatdar never need to use the GIDC internal roads or for that matter, previously the 'naliya'. According to them, the plaintiffs have access to their own lands through a shorter, alternative and more convenient road. Their litigation is thus wholly without substance.
5. The original plaintiffs however strongly urged that the GIDC does not have any right over the 'naliya' land. Such land was never allotted by the Government to GIDC. Successive applications for reconsideration of the issue have been rejected by the Collector, despite which GIDC has not only occupied such 'naliya' land but also included such land as part of its layout and alloted portion thereof to individual purchasers. Counsel Page 3 of 7 C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER pointed out that even the proposal by the GIDC to the Collector for reconsideration of the issue of allotment of 'naliya' land to GIDC come with an assurance that in lieu of such road, the GIDC would permit members of the public free access from the internal roads.
6. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and having perused documents on record, several issues of considerable importance on one hand to the plaintiffs and on the other hand to the residents of GIDC, Dediyasan need to be examined afresh by the Mamlatdar. Mamlatdar's inquiry seems rather brief and at any rate, only after hearing the officers of GIDC. It cannot be denied that the local residents would be vitally affected by any order that the Mamlatdar may pass. In fact, it appears that the case of the plaintiffs also was that not the GIDC, but some unknown persons had blocked the access. It may be that the plaintiffs were not able to identify the persons who might have actually carried out such obstruction. Nevertheless, the members of Sardardham Society would certainly have a right to be heard. At the same time, since the order of the Mamlatdar and Assistant Collector already directed reopening of the access and even according to the petitioners, such directions were at out point of time carried out, till the Mamlatdar decides the matter again, there cannot be any obstruction Page 4 of 7 C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER to the plaintiffs using such internal roads of GIDC for their access to the lands. Learned Counsel for the original plaintiffs submitted that after reopening most of the accesses, residents of the locality have put up fresh obstruction. Learned Counsel Ms.Jani stated that presently there is no such obstruction, but if there is any, the same would be removed till the Mamlatdar passes his fresh order.
6. Under the circumstances, this Revision Petition is disposed of with following directions:-
I. The impugned orders of the Mamlatdar and Assistant Collector dated 05.06.2013 and 21.02.2014 respectively are set aside.
Matter is placed before the Mamlatdar for fresh consideration and disposal in accordance with law.
II. Mamlatdar shall permit any authorized representative group of the residents of Sardardham Society to be joined as additional defendant in such proceedings. For such purpose, the present petitioners shall give widest possible publicity to this order and the proposal to join such proceedings in the locality as well as in Page 5 of 7 C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER any public newspaper of vernacular language having sufficiently wide publicity. The petitioners would thereupon form a group of not more than three persons who would represent the case of the members of the locality before the Mamlatdar. No further grievance of non-
hearing from any members of the local residents would hereafter be entertained. III. Till Mamlatdar decides the remand proceedings afresh, there shall be no obstruction created by the petitioners or any other members of the locality. If there is any obstruction presently standing, the same shall be immediately removed and such situation shall continue till the Mamlatdar decides the remanded proceedings. To ensure that there may not be any dispute between the parties about existence or removal of obstruction, the Mamlatdar, Mehsana shall remain present at the site at 10 O'clock on 06.08.2015. It will be open for the petitioners as well as the private respondents to remain present at that time. As far as possible Page 6 of 7 C/CRA/87/2014 ORDER between 10 to 11 on that day, the Mamlatdar shall inspect whether all gates have been removed /opened. If any of the gates are not removed or opened, the Mamlatdar shall ensure that the same are opened. The petitioners or any other members of the locality would not be allowed to close or obstruct the gates till the Mamlatdar passes his fresh order.
7. I have expressed no opinion on the rival contentions and Mamlatdar is therefore free to decide the issues on the basis of materials that may be brought on record.
(AKIL KURESHI, J.) SHITOLE Page 7 of 7