Gujarat High Court
Jayantilal Girdharlal vs Ahmedabad Municipal on 13 August, 2013
Author: C.L.Soni
Bench: C.L. Soni
JAYANTILAL GIRDHARLAL MISTRYV/SAHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION C/SCA/3442/2012 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3442 of 2012 ================================================================ JAYANTILAL GIRDHARLAL MISTRY & 2....Petitioner(s) Versus AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & 4....Respondent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR PINAKIN M RAVAL, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 3 M/S RJ RAWAL ASSOC., ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DIPEN DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS SHIVYA A DESAI, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 1 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3 - 5 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI Date : 13/08/2013 ORAL ORDER
1. The petitioner has made following prayers in para No.13 of the petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
(A) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent No.1 to remove an illegal and unauthorized construction put up by the Res. No.2 upon the common plot of the society.
(B) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue direction to the respondent No.1 to take appropriate steps/actions against the respondent NO.2 for compliance of the order passed by the learned Board of Nominees dated 2.5.1994 in lavad suit no.1739 of 93.
(C) That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue direction to take appropriate steps against against Res. No.3 for unnecessary interfering in the process of law and further be pleased to issue direction against Res. No. 4 for not taking any action against Res. No. 2.
That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the learned Board of Nominees to hear and expedite the contempt application pending before Learned Board of Nominees being no.56 of 2010 and further be pleased to direct the Learned Board of Nominees to issue an appropriate direction against the respondent no.2 and 3 in accordance with law.
(E) Pending admission, hearing and disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to remove an illegal and unauthorized construction put up by the Res.No.2 upon common plot of the Society.
The petitioner has made manifold grievances in the petition as regards illegal construction on the common plot of the society and the action in hand in gloves with police and persons in power. However, during the course of hearing of the matter, learned Advocate Shri Sunit Shah appearing with learned Advocate Shri Pinakin Raval for the petitioner, focused on the main grievance about non taking of any decision for quite long time by the Board of Nominees on the application for contempt moved by the petitioner before the learned Board of Nominees. Learned advocate Shri Sunit Shah submitted that at least more than one and half years have passed after the petitioner has moved the application for contempt, however, learned Board of Nominees have not taken any decision on such application. He submitted that the petitioner had put-forth strong case as regards breach of the order passed by the Board of Nominees and the sufferance undergone by the petitioner on account of his taking action against the society. He, therefore, submitted that it is high-time that the Board of Nominees takes decision on application of the petitioner for contempt, especially when the hearing of such application is already over.
Learned advocate Shri Desai for the society confirms that the hearing of the application of contempt is already over and now it is kept for orders.
Learned advocate Shri Sunit Shah, therefore, submitted that if this Court is inclined to give some direction to learned Board of Nominees for taking early decision on application of contempt, moved by the petitioner, the petitioner may not press the other prayers made in para No.13(A), 13(B) and 13(C) and this Court may leave it open for the petitioners to take appropriate remedy, available under the law to the petitioner.
Learned advocate Shri Desai has got no objection if the above said course is adopted and the learned Board of Nominees is directed to take the decision on the application for contempt at the earliest.
In view of the above, the following directions are issued;
I. This petition is not entertained for the prayers made in para Nos.13(A), 13(B) and 13(C).
II. It will be open for the petitioner to take appropriate remedy available under law for the above said prayers. It is made clear that the Court has not gone into merits of the case in respect of the above said prayers and all rights and contentions are kept open in connection with the said prayers.
III. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, especially the fact that learned Board of Nominees has finally heard the arguments of learned advocates appearing for the parties on application for contempt moved by the petitioner, learned Board of Nominees is directed to see that the decision/order on such application is rendered at the earliest but, not later than 2 months from today.
Learned Advocate Mr.Sunit Shah states that the liberty reserved for the petitioner to take appropriate remedy in respect of the prayers 13(A), 13(B) and 13(C), especially prayer 13(C) of the petition, may also include taking of appropriate remedy before the Human Rights Commission. It is needless to say that all remedies are available under law including to approach the Human Rights Commission.
With above directions and observations, the petition stands disposed of with liberty as reserved above. Notice discharged.
(C.L.SONI, J.) ANKIT Page 5 of 5