Gujarat High Court
Thakarsibhai Bhagwan & 3 vs State Of Gujarat & on 29 August, 2017
Author: Rajesh H.Shukla
Bench: Rajesh H.Shukla
C/SCA/14522/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14522 of 2017
==========================================================
THAKARSIBHAI BHAGWAN & 3....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PREMAL R JOSHI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 1.4 , 2 - 2.2 , 3
- 4.1
MRS KIRAN P JOSHI, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 1.4 , 2 - 2.2 , 3 -
4.1
MR. BHARGAV PANDYA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA
Date : 29/08/2017
ORAL ORDER
1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Articles 14, 16 and 226 of the Constitution of India as well as under the Gujarat Town Planning Act, 1976 and the Rules framed thereunder for the prayers as prayed for in the petition inter alia that appropriate writ, order or direction may be issued to the Respondent Corporation inviting Expression of Interest for development of the Integrated Group Housing Facility for slum rehabilitation as per PPP Policy 2013 by the Government of Gujarat on PPP / Turn Key basis under Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna (PMAY), for the reasons stated in the Page 1 of 4 HC-NIC Page 1 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 09 06:01:27 IST 2017 C/SCA/14522/2017 ORDER memo of petition.
2. Heard learned Advocate Shri Premal R. Joshi for the petitioners and learned AGP Mr. Bhargav Pandya for the Respondent State.
3. Learned Advocate Shri Premal Joshi for the petitioners has referred to the background of the facts and pointedly referred to the papers including Annexure-B which is an extract of property card to support his contention that the land belongs to Bhagwanjibhai Kanabhai. He submitted that in the Expression of Interest inviting tenders produced at Annexure-A, the land of the petitioners is covered, and therefore, the present petition may be entertained. However, he also fairly referred to the other proceedings and also referred to Annexure-F to support his contention about the claim made by the petitioners and has referred to the other proceedings including Urban Land Ceiling Act as well as the impugned order. In the order passed by the Deputy Collector in Appeal Case No.5 of 2005 a detailed discussion has been made with regard to fact that the land belongs to the government. It is also recorded that the petitioners are also resorted to Section 37 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code and have failed to establish their rights. Therefore, as recorded in the order at Annexure-M, when the petitioners have failed to establish their right, title, interest as per Section 37(2) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code and when the appeal has also Page 2 of 4 HC-NIC Page 2 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 09 06:01:27 IST 2017 C/SCA/14522/2017 ORDER been dismissed, it is too late now in the light of the day to entertain any such claim to stall the notice inviting tenders for construction of the project for the residence. Therefore the submission made by learned Advocate that as the revision is pending, and if the petition is not entertained, ultimately, some order is passed and he may be prejudiced, is without any merit inasmuch as the order at Annexure-M has dealt with the issue with regard to the nature of right, title, interest claimed by the petitioners and it has been clearly observed that the record is nil and there is no entry in the name of the petitioners in the revenue record. Further, as stated above, the petitioners have not made the claim under Section 37 of BLRC to establish their title over the land in question. Thus, when the petitioners have failed to establish any claim over the land in question as per Section 37(2) of the BLRC, they cannot claim any right, title, interest. Therefore, the land in question which is allotted for the PPP Policy for the Integrated Group Housing facility for slum rehabilitation, cannot be stayed as it does not call for any interference.
4. In the circumstances, the present petition deserves to be dismissed in limine and accordingly stands dismissed.
Page 3 of 4 HC-NIC Page 3 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 09 06:01:27 IST 2017 C/SCA/14522/2017 ORDER (RAJESH H.SHUKLA, J.) JNW Page 4 of 4 HC-NIC Page 4 of 4 Created On Sat Sep 09 06:01:27 IST 2017