Gujarat High Court
Patel Dinesh Bhikhabhai vs Collector, Patan on 8 October, 2018
Author: C.L. Soni
Bench: C.L. Soni
C/SCA/14179/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14179 of 2018
==========================================================
PATEL DINESH BHIKHABHAI
Versus
COLLECTOR, PATAN
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIRAL J DAVE(5751) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1
for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1,2,3,4,4.1,4.2,5,5.1,5.2,5.3,5.4,5.5,5.6
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI
Date : 08/10/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution with following prayers made in para 21 thereof:-
"A. That this Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing to respondent no.1 to initiate the legal action for vesting the land bearing revenue survey no.96/1 paiki having the city survey no.1719 admeasuring 1531.15 sq meter in the state government.
B. That pending Admission hearing and Final disposal of this petition this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to initiate legal inquiry with regard to transactions pertaining to the land bearing revenue survey no.95 paiki and 96/1 paiki having the city survey no.1719 of Patan city.
C. ......
D. ......"
2. Before the Court refers to the case of the petitioner in the petition, averments made in para 15 of the present petition need to be first referred, which are as under:-
(15) The petitioner respectfully submits that at present on the land bearing revenue survey no.96/1 paiki and 95 paiki commercial complex namely "ShivDev Complex" for office purpose is constructed. The petitioner further submits that he has also purchased two shops on the second floor of the said premises for consideration of Rs.70,00,00/-. The petitioner has also paid Rs.5,00,000/- but partnership firm was not ready and willing to execute the registered sale deed Page 1 of 3 C/SCA/14179/2018 ORDER and whenever petitioner had approached the partners of the firm they were avoiding the petitioner and were also giving very vague reply to the petitioner. Sometime the petitioner was also threatened and therefore the petitioner inquired into the matter and he came to the knowledge about the fact that the complex is constructed against the sanctioned plan and more than permitted offices are constructed in the said complex and therefore the petitioner had also complained to the Collector vide its representation dated 17.3.17 but no concrete steps were taken therefore the petitioner constrained to file writ petition before this hon'ble Court being S.C.A. No.16718 of 2017. This Hon'ble Court vide order dated 8.12.2017 directed nagar palika Patan to consider the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner has come to the knowledge that the firm has paid the impact fee and got the construction regularized.
3. In the petition, the petitioner seeks to raise grievance that though the land in question was to be used for residential purpose and only by persons in whose favour the permission was granted, the very nature of entitlement to hold the land was changed by first formation of the partnership and then including the strange persons in the partnership and then the land was put to non-agriculture use for different purpose and no premium was ever paid and the Collector while granting N.A. permission has not verified whether the premium was paid or not. On such and other averments, the above prayer is sought in the petition.
4. Learned advocate Mr. Dave for the petitioner sought to raise many contentions to point out various irregularities alleged to have been committed in connection with the land in question, including use of the land for different purpose, without permission and without payment of premium.
5. The Court however finds that the petitioner could not be permitted to raise any grievance in this regard.
6. It appears from the averments made in para 15 of the petition, as quoted above, that the petitioner has tried to project his Page 2 of 3 C/SCA/14179/2018 ORDER personal grievance of not getting the sale deed executed in his favour for two shops stated to have been purchased by him in the commercial complex constructed on the land in question. It is required to note that though the petitioner is purchaser of the two shops in the commercial complex, still he has come to make grievance against the construction of the commercial complex by alleging violation of different provisions of law and non-use of the land for original purpose. The Court finds that the petitioner could not be permitted to make such grievance, especially when it appears to the Court that he has personal scores to be settled with the owners of the land in question/ with the owners of the commercial complex wherein he has purchased two shops. The petition is therefore, rejected.
(C.L. SONI, J) OMKAR Page 3 of 3