Gujarat High Court
Swa. Matru Shri Kesarben V. Savaniya ... vs Alarakhabhai Mohmadkhan Patani on 1 August, 2022
Author: A.Y. Kogje
Bench: A.Y. Kogje
C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9505 of 2020
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Sd/-
=======================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see Yes
the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? Yes
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the No
judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as No
to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any order
made thereunder ?
=======================================================================
SWA. MATRU SHRI KESARBEN V. SAVANIYA EDUCATION TRUST THROGH BABUBHAI
VIRABHAI SAVANIYA
Versus
ALARAKHABHAI MOHMADKHAN PATANI
=======================================================================
Appearance:
MR ZUBIN BHARADA with MR RAMESH V SAVANIA for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR MEHUL S.SHAH, SENIOR ADVOCATE assisted by MR DIPEN DESAI(2481) for the
Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4
=======================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 01/08/2022
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. RULE. Learned APP Mr.Dipen Desai waives service of Rule on behalf of respondent No.2.
2. This petition is filed against judgment and order dated 17.07.2020 passed by the 3rd Additional District Judge, Gir Somnath at Veraval in Misc.Civil Appeal No.11 of 2019. By the aforesaid order, the Additional District Judge was pleased to set aside order dated 15.10.2019 passed by the Civil Judge below application Exh.5 Page 1 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 in Regular Civil Suit No.64 of 2019. The petitioner herein is the original plaintiff and the respondents are the original defendants. The plaintiff had filed Civil Suit No.64 of 2019 claiming easementary rights over the property of the defendants. The said suit was filed with following prayers:-
"(A) In the disputed land of Revenue Survey no. 93 / paiki 2 of village - Dabhor, Tal. Veraval - Patan, Dist.-Gir Somnath, at its east side at the distance of about 25 feet, near a wide road of National Highway from Jetpur - Somnath, where a very old disputed road of 25 feet is there at its north-south which is in the land of Revenue Survey no. 94/1 paiki - 2 of village Dabhor. This road is adjacent to the above land (of R.S. no. 93/2) , from where the students who are studying in the school which is run by a Trust are passing, teaching as well an not teaching staff members, Servants, Agents, Trustees and other people are using this road and it is also used for transportations of School bus, heavy and light vehicles, electric wires and poles, telephone wires and gutter pipes for sanitation.
Hence it is prayed to kindly pass an order to establish the right of easement (easement rights) regarding it (the road) as we have been using it since beginning in capacity of the owner.
(B) Hence, kindly pass a permanent Stay Order (Injunction) in the benefit of us - the Petitioners and against the Opponents this case, stating that the Opponent themselves as well as their servants, their people, Agents or any person from Page 2 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 their behalf might not create or not get to create through others any hurdles or prevent us, or shall not quarrel with us while using the above road as our easement right."
2.1 The petitioner had also filed application Exh.5 praying as under:-
"(A) Be pleased to grant interim relief against the respondents of this case that respondents of this case may, himself or through his servants, agents or any on their behalf, not obstruct, restrain, using the easement right of passage of commutation of the students studying in school being run by we, trust, guardians, educational and non-educational staff, servants, agents, trustees and other persons and commutation of school bus, heavy and light vehicles, carrying electricity poles, telephone wires, carrying the gutter and water pipes from the suit land mentioned in para-3 of the prayer clause situated at mauje Dabhor, Ta.-Veraval-Patan, Dist.-Gir Somnath bearing Revenue Survey No.93 Paiki 2 of which National Highway Jetpur-Somnath as wide as 25 feet from the East to West long from North to South of the years long suit land, may not destroy the the suit passage or any of its part, may not change its form. Be pleased to grant such interim relief in favor of the we, plaintiff and against the respondents till final disposal of the suit."
2.2 The 2nd Additional Civil Judge, Veraval was pleased to Page 3 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 allow the said application Exh.5 by order dated 15.10.2019, operative part of which reads as under:-
"(1) The application is hereby allowed.
(2) Defendants are directed not to obstruct by any means the ingress and egress of the students, their parents, educational - non educational staff, agents, servants, trustees and others from using the suit property as passage till the final disposal of the suit.
(3) The cost of the application is to follow the result of the suit."
2.3 The defendants-respondents herein filed appeal being Misc.Civil Appeal No.11 of 2019 before the 3rd Additional District Judge, Gir Somnath at Veraval against the aforesaid order, wherein following order was passed:-
"(1) As per the provisions of C.P.C. Order-43, the application of the applicant is allowed. The order dated 15/10/2019 passed by the Ld. Second Additional Civil Judge, Veraval in Regular Civil Suit No.64/2019 is hereby set aside.
(2) The applications at Exhibit-12, 17 and 21 of the applicant are to be considered disposed as per the aforesaid order.
(3) The trial court should decide the suit without prejudiced by the prima facie observations of the above order.Page 4 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022
C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 (4) The defendant to pay the costs of the applicant and bear his own costs. Send the record to the trial court along with a copy of this order."
3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner-Trust is a public Education trust and the same was registered on 04.04.2006 under the Bombay "Public Trusts Act and having registered Office at Ronaj, Ta.Kodinar, Dist. Gir Somnath. Its main objects are imparting education to the needy rural people. The petitioner-trust purchased land vide registered sale deed No.2692, dated 14.08.2008 land bearing Dabhor Village Survey No. 94/1 Paiki 2 with easementary right of approach road/way to the aforesaid land from the Veraval Bye pass Road/ National Highway which was passing nearest to the Dabhor Village Survey No. 93/Paiki 2 residential purpose barred land. The said land was purchased by Smt. Ujiben Jashabhai Barad, President of Sutrapada Nagarpalika. The said Smt. Ujiben Jashabhai Barad the wife of Shri Jashabhai Bhanabhai Barad and respondent no.2 his son and Power of Attorney Holder for said land Dilipbhai Jashabhai Barad, who is local political leader. The approach road is 25 feet width from East to West and Length from National Highway to Campus- North to south and both side of the road had Trees and East side having electric pole. The right of easement road/approached road in the said land of respondent no.2 that easementary right of way derived to the petitioner - Trust from seller/transferor who was also enjoying the same right of easement. Thereafter, the Trust started Page 5 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 Shantiniketan Primary School, Vision English Medium School, Sundaram Secondary School, Shivam Higher Secondary School and Sandipani Hostel in the name and style of K.V. Savaniya Education Campus on the aforesaid Trust land. The petitioner is campus director of the Trust's campus.
3.1 It is submitted that, in about 2011, North side portion of said land was acquired by National High Way Authorities of India (NHAI) to preparing Jetpur-Somnath National High way, thereafter, respondent no.2 and his father wanted to start petrol pump, restaurant and commercial activities etc. in the said land. Therefore, respondent no.2 and his father demanded 2 vigha Trust's land (3200 square meters) from the petitioner without any consideration. As the Petitioner and trustees of the trust did not accede to the demand of respondent No.2 and his father to give land free without any consideration, respondent No.2 and his father started harassing the petitioner and trustees by misusing the Police machinery by filing false complaints making false allegations and through others without any proof and arrest without complete investigation to take over Trust's land and campus. 3.2 Thereafter on 06.07.2019, respondents and their persons threatened the Petitioner not to make use of the aforesaid approach road. Consequently, an application for Police protection was sent through email to the District Superintendent of Police, Gir Somnath. However, no Police protection was given either to the Page 6 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 Petitioner or to the students. Subsequently, on 07.07.2019 respondents and J.B. Barad sent few strong-men/persons to illegally cut the trees standing on both the sides of the approached road. On bringing this to the notice of the Police, the Police again did not provide any Police protection to the Petitioner. Therefore on 11.07.2019, the Petitioner was compelled to file Regular Civil Suit No. 64/2019 (hereinafter referred to in short as 'the Suit' for the sake of brevity) along with application below Exhibit -5 for temporary injunction. The Petitioner also filed application Exhibit 6 for Appointment of Court Commissioner for drawing panch rojkam and preparing map of suit Road. The Ld. Additional Civil Judge, Veraval was pleased to pass an Order of maintenance of status quo in the application below Exh.-5. The Ld. Civil Judge appointed a Court Commissioner and issued notice to the Respondents and listed the matter on 15.07.2019.
3.3 Despite there being an order of maintenance of status quo with the regard to the road that formed the subject matter of the Civil Suit, took law into his hands and arranged for few muscle- men and attempted to demolish the suit road so that no road can be recorded in "panch rojkam". Accordingly, on the intervening midnight of 13th and 14th July 2019, at 2 AM, one person having S surname as Haresh Padhiyar along with 12 persons came there (suit road) along with 2 J.C.B Machines and started demolishing the approach road.
Page 7 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022
C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 3.4 It is further submitted that thereafter, on on 15.07.2019 at 2.30 PM, respondent No.2 with four persons came at the suit road and prevented the students of the campus from passing through the suit road and therefore, when the Petitioner requested them to allow them to use the aforesaid approach road, the Petitioner was again threatened with dire consequences and they informed the petitioner that the road will be closed for passage from/midnight. Thereafter, in the midnight, 2 bumpers came there and dumped big stones at the entry of the suit road. When the Petitioner requested them not to do so, the Petitioner was again threatened with dire consequences. Thereafter, in the early morning on the ensuing day, five persons sent by respondent no.2 came there and prevented the students from passing through the suit road. The Petitioner approached the Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Veraval by filing Criminal Enquiry Case No. 22/19 u/s 156 of Cr. P. C. and Ld. Chief Judicial Magistrate was pleased to pass an Order directing the P.I. to register the FIR against respondent no.2 and others and submit investigation report within 30 days. Thereafter, on 07.11.2019 a FIR being No. M/01/2019 came to be registered with Prabhiash Patan Police Station against respondent no.2 and 12 others U/s. 427, 442, 452, 504, 506(2), 120(B).
4. As against this, learned Senior Advocate for the respondents submitted that Civil Suit No.64 of 2019 is nothing but Page 8 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 abuse of process of law and absolutely frivolous Civil Suit. In the sale deed dated 21.03.199/, whereby the respondent No.2 has purchased the land bearing survey No.93 paiki, there is no mention of any right of way by way of 25 feet road in favour of owner of land bearing survey No.94 or even any existence of any such 25 feet road available for ingress and egress to land bearing survey No.94. Therefore, in absence of any such mention in the sale deed, whereby the respondent No.2 has purchased the land survey No.93 paiki, no right of way can be claimed.
4.1 It is submitted that as far as the sale deed in favour of the petitioner is concerned and as far as the reliance placed by the petitioner to the reference of 25 feet wide road from the land of the respondent No.2, it is submitted that the erstwhile owner of land bearing survey No.94 paiki from whom the petitioner has purchased that land has no right to say whatsoever that there is 25 feet road available from land of the respondent No.2. Further, mere mention of such road in the sale deed of survey No.93 paiki would not confer any right in favour of the petitioner. 4.2 It is further submitted that the petitioner has produced forged and concocted record not only before the learned trial Court, but also before this Hon'ble Court. It is submitted that the map produced at page-55 of the present proceedings is forged and concocted map. The respondent No.2 has filed an application under section 340 of Cr. P.C. before the learned civil court for producing Page 9 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 forged and concocted record before the civil court. Further, the petitioner has also filed FIR before the Veraval Police Station bearing FIR No.1118600920743 of 2020 for offences punishable under Sections 465, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code for producing false and concocted map which also has forged and concocted seal of the authority and the said police is investigating the said FIR.
4.3 It is submitted that the authorized signatories of the petitioner are habitual offenders and numerous complaints have been lodged against the said trustees/authorized signatories namely Babubhal Virabhai Savaniya and Rameshbhai Virabhai Savaniya. The said persons are known to be blackmailers who initiate frivolous proceedings in Courts of law and then extract money for withdrawing such proceedings. It is submitted that the numerous criminal complaints have been lodged against them. The petitioner had filed a private complaint against the respondent No.2 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Veraval and the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Veraval has been pleased to pass order under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code directing to lodge the FIR for allegedly trespassing on the land. The said FIR has been lodged against the power of attorney holder of the respondent No.2 and others. Against aforesaid order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Veraval and against the registration of FIR, accused persons had approached this Court by Page 10 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 way of Special Criminal Application No.10194 of 2019. In the said petition, this Court vide order dated 18.02.2020 has been pleased to pass interim order that no Coercive steps shall be taken against the said petitioner respondents herein) | The said order was passed after hearing the learned advocate for the petitioner herein who had appeared on the date of hearing before this Hon'ble Court on 18.02.2020, inspite of which, preferring of quashing petition and passing of interim order has not been disclosed by the petitioner herein and the said fact has been suppressed. It is submitted that in order to seek easmentary right, 20 years of continuous usage is neither been pleaded nor even proved by the plaintiff and therefore, in absence of basic requirement, no relief may be granted to the petitioner.
4.4 It is submitted that there is another approach road available to the petitioner and there us no dispute on the availability of the said approach road. Therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner petitioner and balance of convenience is also not in favour Of the petitioner. As stated above, there is no prima-facie case of the petitioner and none of the three ingredients required for grant of interim relief are present.
5. Having heard learned Advocates for the parties and having perused documents on record, it appears that the point in issue which is required to be dealt with is the right of easement on the basis of prescription, which is foundation of the plaintiff. Even Page 11 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 from the pleadings, the claim for easementary right of way by prescription is evident. However, requirement of establishing right of easement by way of prescription is clearly defined from the chronology of transfer of land under the documents, which prima facie, over a period of 20 years cannot be said to have been established.
6. From various judgments cited, the principles regarding easement can be discerned as under:-
"Kinds of Easements :
Section 5 of the Indian Easements Act, defines different kinds of easements like continuous and discontinuous, apparent and non-apparent easements.
A continuous easement is one whose enjoyment is or may be continual without the act of man.
A discontinuous easement is one that needs the act of man for its enjoyment.
An apparent easement is one the existence of which is shown by some permanent sign, which, upon careful inspector by a competent person, would be visible to him.
A non-apparent easement is one that has no such sign.
Illustrations
(a) A right annexed to B's house to receive light by the window without obstruction by his neighbour 'A'. This is a continuous easement.
(b) A right of way annexed to A's house over B's land.
This is a discontinuous easement.
(c) Rights annexed to A's land to lead water thither across B's land by an aqueduct and to draw off water thence by a drain. The drain would be discovered upon Page 12 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 careful inspection by a person conversant with such matter These are apparent easements.
(d) A right annexed to A's house to prevent B from building oil his own land. This is a non-apparent easement.
Essential of an Easement :
A] There must be an owner or occupier of certain land.
B] There must be a right vested in such owner or occupier (as such owner or occupier) to do and continue to do something, or to prevent and continue to prevent something done in, or upon, or in respect of, some other land.
C] The right must be for the beneficial enjoyment of his land. Thus, if the right is not in any way connected with the enjoyment of the dominant tenement (property) it cannot be an easement.
D] The other land in or upon which the right to be exercised, must not be owned or occupied by him, but by some other person.
Characteristics of an Easement :
A] There must be a dominant and servient tenement.
B] The right of easement must be possessed for the beneficial requirement of the dominant tenements.
C] Dominant and servient owners must be different persons.
D] The right should entitle the dominant owner to do and to continue to do something or to prevent and continue to prevent something being done, in or upon or in respect of the servient tenement.
E] That something must be of a certain or well defined character and must be capable of forming the subject- matter of a grant.
Conditions for the acquisition of an Easement :
A] Peaceably : The word 'peaceably' was held to mean that the plaintiff who claims to be the dominant owner Page 13 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 has neither been obliged to resort to physical force himself at any time to exercise his right within 20 years; nor had he been prevented by the use of physical force by the defendant in his enjoyment of such right.
B] Openly : Except in the case of light and air, the enjoyment must be open and manifest and not clandestine. The reason of the requirement that the user must be open lies in the fact that acquiescence lies at the root of all prescription, and where the enjoyment is not open it cannot be said that it is within the knowledge of the owner of the servient tenement.
C] As an easement : If as person claims a site as owner, he cannot claim a right of way over the same as an easement. The words denote that the acts relied upon as evidence of the existence of a right must be done by one person upon the land of the other.
D] As of right : It means that the enjoyment must be as of a right for twenty years (if against the government thirty years) or more without any leave or licence.
E] Without interruption : Means without any obstruction on the part of the person against whom the easement is claimed. Mere non-user of the easement for a time is not an interruption within the meaning of the section.
F] Enjoyment must be for twenty years : The enjoyment must be continued down to within two years of the date of suit in which the right is contested i.e. where a person is in the continuous enjoyment of an easement for more than 20 years and an obstruction is thereafter made, he must bring his suit to establish his right within a period of limitation of two years from the date of such obstruction, otherwise his right will be defeated.
Who will acquire the Easement :
The following are the categories of the persons who acquire the easement.
A] Occupier : Where a person is in possession of property on behalf of owner, he can claim an easement.
B] Tenant : Tenants in dominant tenement enjoying an easement as of right, acquire it from the landlord.Page 14 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022
C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 When the plaintiff and defendant are tenants of a common landlord, the plaintiff can not acquire any right of easement over the defendants' tenancy land either under section 13 or section 15; for the benficial enjoyment of his land. There is however, no bar to his acquiring the right as a customary easement or on the basis of implied grant from the landlord but not on the basis of prescription. Tenant can acquire an easement over the adjoining land belonging to his landlord for the beneficial enjoyment of other immovable property not his own but belonging to someone else which also he happens to occupy for the time being as a tenant. Tenant can claim right of easement over his landlord's property based in immemorial user but not on prescription."
7. The Suit is preferred mainly contending that the plaintiff has easmentary right of way from land bearing survey No.93 paiki 2 of village Dabor, Taluka: Veraval, District: Gir Somnath which is owned by the respondent No.2 herein. The petitioner herein is the owner of land bearing survey No.94 and adjacent to the said survey No.94 is land bearing survey No.93 paiki of the respondent No.2. The petitioner has purchased the said land bearing survey No.94 by way of registered sale deed dated 14.08.2008. The respondent No.2 has purchased land bearing survey No.93 paiki from Alarakhabhai Mohamadkhan Patani by way of registered sale deed dated 31.03.1997.
8. It has to be proved that the said easmentary right is peacefully enjoyed without any interruption for 20 years. In the present case, the land in question is purchased by the petitioner in the year 2008 and the petitioner-original plaintiff has not produced any evidence whatsoever that the land/approach road of 25 feet on Page 15 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 the land of the respondent No.2 was in existence since more than 20 years and the Predecessor in title was using the said road. Further, it is not even pleaded that the So called road was existing since 20 years and the same was being used since more than 20 years without any interruption.
9. It appears that continuous use of the said approach road for 20 years is neither pleaded in the suit nor any evidence in that regard is placed, which is the basic requirement for claiming any easmentary right right under Section 15 of the Act.
10. Learned Advocate for both the sides have relied upon the map prepared at the time of panchnama to explain to the Court the situation prevailing. Aid was also taken of the photographs produced by both the sides. The trial Court appears to have disregarded the requirement of law when claim of easement is made on the basis of prescription and has taken into consideration the issue of no other alternative available. From the map drawn by the Court Commissioner as well as the maps which are prepared at the time of grant of NA permission would indicating that the alternative way was always available. The appellate Court was therefore justified in taking into consideration these aspects to set aside the order below application Exh.5.
11. At this stage, it would be relevant to refer to the recitals of the sale deed on 2008, by which the plaintiff /petitioner Page 16 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 came in possession of the land in question. The relevant clause of the said sale deed reads as under:-
"There is a road of 25 feet width (road of Twenty Five feet width) in the non-agricultural land of Ujiben Jashabhai located in the north of the property sold to you through the said sale-deed, which is an agricultural land with Revenue Survey No - 94/1 Paiki Part - 2 of village Dabhor with the area admeasuring around Hectare 0 Are 81 Square Meter 95, for the rights to passage, to pass big - small, heavy - light vehicles, to pass wires of telephone, to pass drainage, water connection in the said property. There are permanent rights of passage in the said land through the said road. Further, we give you the easement rights of using- utilizing the said land, easement rights of passage of water, telephone wires, drainage, water pipes and all the other ancillary rights of using and utilizing the said property by the absolute sale of the said property through this sale deed. As mentioned above, the owners of the said property give you the easement rights on the 25 feet (width of twenty five feet) road passing from the non-agricultural land of Ujiben Jashabhai located at the north of the said property through the absolute sale. The executants have the rights of drainage of rain waters through the said road, we also give you all such rights by the absolute sale through the said sale-deed. Further, we also give you all the rights of other roads applicable to the said land by the absolute sale through the said sale-deed."
11.1 The aforesaid would therefore reflect a semblance of the right of way in the sale deed itself. The question of the exact Page 17 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022 C/SCA/9505/2020 JUDGMENT DATED: 01/08/2022 location of this road mentioned is to be established upon a full- fledged trial. However, the relevant consideration is about the usage of the disputed road for ingress and egress by the students of the school run by the petitioner /plaintiff.
12. Considering the nature of dispute in existence before the trial Court and the fact that the issue pertains to ingress and egress of the students of a school run by the plaintiff, the Court deems it fit to dispose of the petition with a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the Civil Suit itself in a time bound program, i.e. within a period of 1 year from today. The Court, by this judgment and order, also provides that pending final disposal of the Civil Suit, the respondents shall permit ingress and egress of the students without any vehicular movement from the plot in question.
13. The petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute. No order as to costs.
14. At this stage, learned advocate for the respondents prays for stay of this judgment and order. However, considering the fact that the issue relates to the school going children and the school is fully operational, the prayer is refused.
Sd/-
(A.Y. KOGJE, J) SHITOLE Page 18 of 18 Downloaded on : Sat Dec 24 22:28:55 IST 2022