Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 9]

Gujarat High Court

Naranbhai Lallubhai Patel vs B.S. Oza And Ors. on 7 March, 1988

Equivalent citations: (1988)1GLR646

JUDGMENT
 

P.R. Gokulakrishnan, C.J.
 

1. All the Advocates representing the various parties herein are agreeable to dispose of this petition finally.

2. In this Special Civil Application, petitioner wants to quash and set aside the Town Planning Scheme No. 2 prepared by respondent No. 1 for the town of Unjha. Various grievances are made, including mala fides, on the part of the authority in preparing such a preliminary scheme. Section 64 of the Act deals with submission of preliminary scheme to the Government. Section 65 of the Act deals with the power of the Government to sanction or refuse to sanction the scheme. As per Section 65(1)(a), the Government, in respect of the preliminary scheme, will take action within a period of two months from the date of its receipt either for sanctioning the same or refusing to sanction or for making such modifications, as in its opinion, necessary. Section 65(2) visualises notification sanctioning the preliminary scheme or the final scheme. Such a notification has to be there for a period of one month and in certain cases it may be extended for a further period not exceeding three months at a time. Section 65(3) makes it clear that on and after the date fixed in such notification, the preliminary scheme or the final scheme, as the case may be, shall have effect as if it were enacted in this Act.

3. Reading the abovesaid provisions in the Act, it is clear that a preliminary scheme subsequent to the period mentioned in the notification becomes a part of the Act itself. The petitioner herein has time enough to question such sanctioning of the preliminary scheme before it becomes part of the enactment. As it is, this Special Civil Application is premature and accordingly the same has to be rejected.

4. Mr. Jani, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, brings to our notice that objections have been submitted to the State Government as early as on 20-6-1987 by the respondent No. 2 and inspite of that, no order has been passed; nor any hearing has been given to the party concerned. The petitioner herein is also at liberty to put his objection before the State Government. Section 65(1)(a) makes it incumbent upon the State Government to come out with a notification within a period of two months from the date of the receipt of the scheme. Inspite of the fact that the preliminary scheme has been sent to the Government and the objections have been filed as early as on 20-6-1987, no action has been taken by the State Government, according to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, uptill this date. Hence, we direct the State Government to take action and issue appropriate notification as expeditiously as possible, keeping in mind the provisions contained in Section 65 of the Act. In view of the abovesaid directions given by us. nothing survives in this Special Civil Application and accordingly the same is rejected at this stage. It is always open to the petitioner to file appropriate Special Civil Application, after the notification in respect of the preliminary scheme before it becomes part of the Act.

5. This order may be communicated to the Government at the cost of the petitioner.

6. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs.