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 2]

Gujarat High Court

Dinesh Sinh Vikram Sinh Jadeja vs State Of Gujarat & 4....Opponent(S) on 13 January, 2015

Bench: Vijay Manohar Sahai, R.P.Dholaria

                C/WPPIL/325/2014                                ORDER




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                          WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 325 of 2014

            [On note for speaking to minutes of order dated 05/01/2015 in
                            C/WPPIL/325/2014 ]
     ===========================================================
     =====
               DINESH SINH VIKRAM SINH JADEJA....Applicant(s)
                                 Versus
                   STATE OF GUJARAT & 4....Opponent(s)
     ================================================================
     Appearance:
     MR IH SYED, ADVOCATE assisted by MR NARENDRA L JAIN, ADVOCATE
     for the Applicant(s) No. 1
     MR UTKARSH SHARMA, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1 - 2
     MR MIHIR JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL assisted by MS GARGI VYAS,
     ADVOCATE for M/S WADIAGHANDY & CO, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s)
     No. 3
     MR BIREN A VAISHNAV, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 4
     MR DEVANG VYAS, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 5
     MR ND GOHIL, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 5
     ================================================================
               CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.
                      VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI
                      and
                      HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA

                                   Date : 13/01/2015


                                     ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI)

1. We have heard Mr. I.H. Syed, learned advocate assisted by Mr.Narendra L.Jain, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Mihir Joshi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Ms. Gargi Vyas, learned advocate for M/s Wadia & Ghandy & Co. for respondent Page 1 of 2 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM 1 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 ORDER No.3.

2. The two Speaking to Minutes have been filed, one by the learned counsel for the petitioner and other by learned counsel for respondent No.3.

3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we have made corrections in our judgment dated 05.01.2015 in paragraph-7. The corrections have been made in 8 th line and 10th line of the order.

4. With the corrections made in the original judgment, both the Speaking to Minutes stand disposed of finally. It shall be open to the learned advocates for the parties to apply for a fresh corrected certified copy of the judgment, after payment of usual charges.

(V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.) (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.) Ashish Tripathi Page 2 of 2 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM 2 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 325 of 2014 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?
5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?

================================================================ DINESH SINH VIKRAM SINH JADEJA....Applicant(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 4....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance:

MR IH SYED, ADVOCATE ASSISTED BY MR NARENDRA L JAIN, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR UTKARSH SHARMA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s) No. 1 - 2 Page 1 of 7 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM

3 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 JUDGMENT MR MIHIR JOSHI, SENIOR COUNSEL ASSISTED BY MR TANVISH BHATT, ADVOCATE FOR M/S WADIA & GHANDY & CO, for the Opponent(s) No. 3 MR BIREN A VAISHNAV, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 4 MR ND GOHIL, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 5 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.

VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA Date : 05/01/2015 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA) 1 This   petition,   in   the   nature   of   Public   Interest   Litigation,   is  filed by the present petitioner raising grievance against respondent  No.3 ­ company,  previously known as Shri Mataji Ashapura Port  (Private) Limited, that the government had allotted a huge parcel  of land admeasuring 367.35 acres at the rate of Rs.1.15 per square  meter  for   development  of the  port.  While  allotting  the  aforesaid  land in question, the allotment was subjected to certain terms and  conditions. It is alleged that the aforesaid company has committed  breach of certain terms and conditions. For the said breach of the  terms   and   conditions,   the   Collector­Kachch   at   Bhuj   has   already  initiated  proceedings  against  the respondent­company, which are  pending   for   consideration   before   the   Collector­Kachchh   at   Bhuj,  Page 2 of 7 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM 4 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 JUDGMENT and for the same grievance also, one another writ petition, in the  nature of Public Interest Litigation, being W.P. (P.I.L.) No.152 of  2014 is filed. 

2 Since the present petitioner has come to know that the land  in question has already changed the hands by way of execution of  the Memorandum of Understanding dated 07.02.2008 in favour of  Sealand   Warehousing   Private   Limited.   It   is   alleged   that   the  aforesaid   transaction   entered into between Sealand Warehousing  Private Limited as well as Mr. Vasudev Ramdas Thacker and others  is   also   alleged   to   have   committed   breach   of   the   terms   and  conditions   of   the   order   of   allotment   dated   11.02.2002,   more  particularly,   condition   No.5   passed   by   the   Collector­Kachchh   at  Bhuj. 

3 The allegation of the present petitioner is that whenever the  aforesaid   land   was   allotted   on   certain   terms   and   condition,   the  original allottee has committed breach of the terms and conditions,  which   goes   to   the   root   of   the   case,   and   consequently,   if   any  Environment Clearance Certificate is to be given in pursuance of  public   hearing   which   was   scheduled   on   12.12.2014,   shall   be  regarded   of   further   illegality,   and   it   shall   put   into   irreversible  Page 3 of 7 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM 5 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 JUDGMENT situation   when   the   land  has   changed  to   the   hands   of  any   other  allottees   who   were   not   unauthorized   to   use   the   land,   for   the  purpose for which it was granted. 

4 Making the aforesaid allegation regarding breach of condition  of   the   order   of   allotment   dated   11.02.2002,   the   petitioner   has  prayed for the following reliefs in the present petition:

"(A) To issue a writ of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate  writ, order or direction, directing the respondent authorities to not  act   as   per   the   notice   dated   10/11/2014   as   far   as   the   land  mentioned in the order at Annexure­A until the case of breach as  shown in Annexure­C is decided. 
(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition,  be pleaded to direct the respondent corporation to not hold the  public hearing of the project qua the land held by the respondent  company. 
(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition,  be pleaded to direct the respondent authorities and/or any other  authority to investigate who has profited by hoarding the land in  question   and   to   take   appropriate   legal   action   against   such  individuals/entities."

5 We have heard learned advocate Shri I.H. Syed, assisted by  learned   advocate   Mr.   Narendra   Jain   for   the   petitioner,   learned  Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Utkarsh Sharma for respondents  No.1   and   2,   learned   senior   counsel   Mr.   Mihir   Joshi   assisted   by  learned advocate Mr. Tanvish Bhatt for M/s. Wadia & Ghandy for  respondent   No.3,   learned   advocate   Mr.   Biren   Vaishnav   for  Page 4 of 7 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM 6 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 JUDGMENT respondent   No.4   and   learned   advocate   Mr.   N.D.   Gohil   for  respondent No.5. 

6 Upon hearing learned advocates for the respective parties as  well   as   going   through   the   materials   available   on   record,   prima  facie, it appears that the allegation made in the petition can only be  decided   by   the   Collector­Kachchh   at   Bhuj,   who   had   allotted   the  aforesaid   land   upon   certain   terms   and   conditions,   and   the  allegation as regards breach of condition No.5 attached to the order  of allotment, which goes to the root of the case, and consequently,  therefore, we deem it proper not to enter into the merits of the  case,   and   the   allegation   made   for   alleged   breach   of   terms   and  conditions by  respondent No.3, who was the original allottee, and  subsequent transferee as alleged by the petitioner. As this matter  has to be examined by the Collector­Kachchh at Bhuj, on merits as  per the provisions under Section 79A of the Gujarat Land Revenue  Code, 1879, the Collector of the concerned district is the competent  authority to decide as regards the allegation of breach of conditions  attached to the grant of land. 

7 Therefore, the Collector­Kachchh at Bhuj is directed to decide  the   allegation   made   by   the   present   petitioner   regarding   alleged  Page 5 of 7 WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014 14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM 7 of 9 C/WPPIL/325/2014 JUDGMENT breach of condition No.5 of order of allotment dated 11.02.2002.  The   present   petitioner   is   permitted   to   file   a   detailed   complaint  along with annexures before the Collector­Kachchh at Bhuj, within  a period of one week from today. The Collector­Kachchh at Bhuj,  after consideration of the aforesaid complaint, shall issue a show  cause notice to the original allotee as well as all the transferees and  shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the present petitioner as  well as the original transferees to the land in question and shall  decide   allegation   of   alleged   breach   of   condition   No.5   and   other  terms   and   conditions,   in   accordance   with   law,   by   passing   a  reasoned   and   speaking   order   within   a   period   of   three   months  thereafter.   It   is   made   clear   that   if   any   application   moved   by  respondent No.3 or any show cause notice issued by the Collector­ Kachchh at Bhuj, the same shall also be decided by the Collector­ Kachchh at Bhuj simultaneously. 

8 Till the matter is decided by the Collector­Kachchh at Bhuj,  the parties shall maintain status quo. 

9 With the aforesaid directions, this petition stands disposed of. 




                                                                 (V.M.SAHAI, ACJ.)


                                         Page 6 of 7
WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014          14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM
                                                                                    8 of 9
                  C/WPPIL/325/2014                               JUDGMENT




                                                             (R.P.DHOLARIA,J.)
     chandresh




                                      Page 7 of 7
WRIPT PETITION (PIL)/325/2014       14/01/2015 02:46:31 AM
                                                                            9 of 9