Gujarat High Court
Jayeshbhai Chanabhai Lathiya- Patel, ... vs State Of Gujarat on 12 October, 2023
Author: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
Bench: Vaibhavi D. Nanavati
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 17477 of 2023
==========================================================
JAYESHBHAI CHANABHAI LATHIYA- PATEL, PRESIDENT, LEO LIONS
CLUB
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PRATIK Y JASANI(5325) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS. MANISHA LAVKUMAR, GOVERNMENT PLEADER with MS. JYOTI
BHATT, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1 to 4
DHRUV TOLIYA(9249) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI
Date : 12/10/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
"7. The petitioner, therefore, prays that:-
(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the circular dated 15.12.2010 (Annexure-A), particularly, Clause more 6 thereof, which pertains to deciding applications on first- cum-first-serve basis is violative and ultra virus to Article 14 of the Constitution of India;
(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to hold and declare that the action of the respondent no.4 in allotting the land/College ground to respondent no.5 is illegal, more particularly, when the application made by the petitioner Page 1 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined dated (Annexure') 20.07.2023 is still pending, in the interest of justice;
(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent no.4 not to allot its ground for the purpose of performing Navratri function to the respondent no.5, in the interest of justice;
(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs, in favour of the petitioner, as deemed fit, in the interest of justice".
2. Heard Mr. Pratik Jasani, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, learned Government Pleader with Ms. Jyoti Bhatt, the learned AGP appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and Mr. Dhruv Toliya, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.5.
3. By way of present petition, the petitioner herein seeks to challenge the action/inaction on the part of respondent No.4 -College in allotting land/ College ground for the purpose of performing Navratri festival to respondent No.5 -Club without deciding the application dated 20.7.2023, which was preferred by the petitioner.
4. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 made an application for leasing Page 2 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined the campus of the respondent No.4 - College for the purpose of performing/ organising Navratri event for the period between 14.10.2023 and 25.10.2023. The respondent No.4 took opinion of the Office of the Collector, requesting respondent No.4 to check feasibility of allotting the campus for the desired period to both the applicants i.e the petitioner as well as respondent No.5 on 50:50 basis. The respondent No.4 rather than checking about the feasibility as opined by the State Government, accepted the rank from the respondent No.5 and virtually made the application of the petitioner academic.
5. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action on the part of the respondent No.4, the petitioner has approached this Court for the reliefs, as prayed for, hereinabove.
6. Mr. Pratik Jasani, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the aforesaid action on the part of the respondent authorities is abusing the fundamental right of the petitioner. It was submitted that the respondent No.4 unilaterally allotted the ground to respondent No.5. It was submitted that the respondent State asked by the respondent No.4 to decide on the feasibility of the rival claimants both having applied for the same ground for the period between 14.10.2023 and 25.10.2023, however, respondent No.4, unilaterally Page 3 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined decided the same and in view thereof the said decision is in blatant violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It was submitted that the Clause-e of the petition, substantiating the contention by Mr. Jasani, the learned advocate for the petitioner and the submissions advanced, considering both together, Clause-e of the petitioner, states that it appears that the respondent No.4 has decided to allot the land to respondent No.5 on the strength of the policy of the State Government dated 15.12.2010, which decides the modalities of allotting/ renting a government land to be used for a temporary period. Clause-6 of the said Circular also is with respect to adopting the policy of first-cum-first-serve. In view thereof, the petitioner seeks to challenge the said Circular also.
6.1 Reliance was placed on the ratio as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Bhubaneswar Development Authority and Another v. Adikanda Biswal and Others, reported in (2012)11 SCC 731 and in case ofCity Industrial Development Corporation v. Platinum Entertainment and others, reported in (2015) 1 SCC 558.
7. Ms. Jyoti Bhatt, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent State submitted that respondent No.5 applied for allotment of the College ground prior in point of time on 19.6.2023 and the petitioner herein has Page 4 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined applied for the same on 20.7.2023 and in view thereof, the respondent No.5 was allotted the ground of the respondent No.4 College for Navratri festival. It is submitted that the petitioner has also taken on rent some other place for Garba and, therefore, the petitioner has managed the ground wherein the petitioner is alloted the ground for Navratri Mahotsav (Page-81) and submitted that as such the cause would not survive. The petitioner is already in receipt of a ground.
8. Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, the learned Government Pleader with Ms. Jyoti Bhatt, the learned AGP appearing for the respondent Nos.1 to 4 submitted that the application of respondent No.5 was prior in point of time. Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, the learned Government Pleader submitted that the ground is forming a part of the Government College. The respondent No.4 allotted the premises on 18.8.2023 to the respondent No.5. It was submitted that while respondent State communicated to the respondent No.4 that feasibility of granting said ground be considered for both the applicants. It appears that the said ground came to be allotted to respondent No.5. While making submissions, Ms. Manisha Lavkumar, the learned Government Pleader has placed on record the ground and the Plan with respect to the same, wherein placing reliance on the same, it was submitted that it is not possible to allot the ground to both the applicants. It Page 5 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined was also submitted that the respondent No.4 allotted the ground to the respondent No.5 especially for the Navratri Garba event. Respondent No.5 is Non-government organization in the field of social service, noble causes and philanthropic activities. Respondent No.5 has been organising Garbas for past 17 years on the said premises of respondent No.4 and the participants include young school going girls to aged women thereby making the requirements of said event more specific and distinct in nature and sample of the said application form of the Garba event and Guest Pass is produced at Annexure R-2.
9. Heard Mr. Dhruv Toliya, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.5. Mr. Toliya, the learned advocate has placed on record affidavit-in-reply. Placing reliance on the said affidavit-in-reply, it was submitted that the respondent No.5 came to be established in the year 1983, solely on a non-profit basis with the good intention of imparting peace and harmony by organising activities that are social, noble and philanthropic in nature. The respondent No.5 applied for allotment of the ground on 19.6.2023. On receipt of the said application, respondent No.5 was granted permission by the respondent No.4 on 18.8.2023.
9.1 Reliance was placed on various permissions that were granted pursuant to the said allotment dated Page 6 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined 18.8.2023. By communications dated 6.10.2023 being 3842 and 3843, two temporary Phase-III electricity connections to enable the respondent No.5 to appropriately avail the necessary electricity to organise Garba Event was issued, a copy of the said letter is produced at Annexure R11. The respondent No.5 is also in receipt of Fire NOC from the Rajkot Municipal Corporation.
9.1 It was submitted that the petitioner herein has already finalised their Garba Event at Nana Mava Circle Corner, Rajkot from 15.10.2023 to 24.10.2023. Placing reliance on the aforesaid submissions, it was submitted that the Respondent No.5 has been granted permissions for applying prior in point of time.
9.2 It was submitted that if the ground is permitted to be used on 50:50 basis, the same may give rise to several logistical issues such as division of parking, division of space, collusion of sound, security of female participants thereby leading to a complete chaos. Placing reliance on the aforesaid, it was submitted that the petition be dismissed.
10. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties. The dispute in question is with respect to allotment of the College ground by the Page 7 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined respondent No.4 to respondent No.5 for organising Garba between 14.10.2023 and 25.10.2023. The respondent No.5 applied for allotment of the said College ground on 19.6.2023, which was received by the Respondent No.4 on 23.6.2023. The petitioner applied for the allotment of the said ground on 20.7.2023. The respondent authorities requested respondent No.4 to consider the application by communication dated 8.8.2023 to consider if the allotment is considered on 50:50 basis, however, the said ground came to be allotted only to respondent No.5 by respondent No.4.
11. In the opinion of this Court, considering the submissions made by learned advocate appearing for the respective parties, the respondent No.5 was prior in point of time to apply for the allotment of the said College Ground and the said ground came to be allotted to respondent No.4 on 28.8.2023. In view thereof, no interference is called for in the aforesaid allotment.
12. So far as the challenge with respect to Circular dated 15.12.2010, in the opinion of this Court, the petitioner herein applied for leasing of College ground on 20.7.2023. The petitioner having failed for the said allotment, has now challenged the said Notification dated 15.12.2010 stating that the petitioner apprehends that the respondent authority while granting the allotment of Page 8 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/17477/2023 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2023 undefined the College ground of the respondent No.4 to respondent No.5, has invoked the Policy of the State Government dated 15.12.2010.
12.1 In view of the aforesaid, in the opinion of this Court, the said notification is challenged only because the petitioner's allotment was not considered. The petitioner herein has malafide against the respondent No.4, the respondent No.5 is allotted the College ground of respondent No.4, because the respondent No.5 applied prior in point of time.
12.2 In view thereof, no malafide can be alleged for any action by the respondent No.4. In view of the aforesaid, neither any legal or fundamental right of the petitioner can be said to have been breached by any of the actions for the respondent authorities.
12.3 In view thereof, in the opinion of this Court, the challenge qua the said Notification dated 15.12.2010 fails. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is not inclined to exercise its extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The present petition stands dismissed.
(VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J) SAJ GEORGE Page 9 of 9 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 13 20:45:39 IST 2023