Gujarat High Court
Lavendrasinh Raghuvirsinh Gohil vs Director & 2 on 30 May, 2014
Author: R.D.Kothari
Bench: R.D.Kothari
C/SCA/7528/2014 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7528 of 2014
===========================================================
LAVENDRASINH RAGHUVIRSINH GOHIL....Petitioner(s)
Versus
DIRECTOR & 2....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR KM SHETH, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR VISHAL PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR SP HASURKAR FOR Respondent No.2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.D.KOTHARI
Date : 30/05/2014
ORAL ORDER
1. Learned advocate for the petitioner seeks leave to delete respondent No.1.
1.1 Permission is granted. Respondent No.1 is deleted from the array of parties.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr.K.M.Sheth for the petitioner.
3. Rule. Learned advocate Mr.S.P.Hasurkar waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2 and learned AGP Mr.Vishal Patel waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.3.
4. At the time of hearing, learned advocates for the parties have drawn attention to judgment of this Court in the case of Page 1 of 3 C/SCA/7528/2014 ORDER Himmatbhat Vallabhbhai Patel v. Chief Engineering (Project) Gujarat Energy Transmission and Ors., reported in 2011 (2) GLH 781 and also to unreported judgment rendered in SCA No.18334 of 2011 and allied matter decided on 29.8.2013.
5. Learned advocate for respondent No.2 has submitted that above-referred unreported judgment is stayed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
6. Upon hearing the learned advocates for the parties, with consent, the following order is passed :
'Present petition filed by the petitioner be treated as obstruction under Section 16 of the Indian Telegraph Act. Accordingly, the respondent No.2 would approach to the District Magistrate, Bharuch to remove the obstruction.
On filing of obstruction application before the District Magistrate, Bharuch, the District Magistrate, Bharuch would decide the same in accordance with law.
It is clarified that if the petitioner's land is not required by respondent No.2, then respondent No.2 would not require to approach the District Magistrate, Bharuch.'
7. Learned advocate Mr.Hasurkar declares that he would accordingly intimate the officers about passing of the order.
8. Present petition stands disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Page 2 of 3 C/SCA/7528/2014 ORDER(R.D.KOTHARI, J.) vipul Page 3 of 3