Gujarat High Court
Agrawal vs Union on 6 October, 2008
Author: S. Dave
Bench: Anant S. Dave, S. Dave
Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4984/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4984 of 2008
======================================
AGRAWAL
VIVEKKUMAR OMPRAKASH
Versus
UNION
OF INDIA & others
======================================
Appearance :
MR
PRAKASH K JANI for Petitioner
MR BIPIN I MEHTA for Respondent Nos.
1 and 2
MS MINOO A SHAH for Respondent
No.3
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE
Date
: 06/10/2008
ORAL
ORDER
1 Challenge in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to orders dated 29th November 2007 and 26th December 2007 by which the 'NOC' granted to the petitioner for construction of petrol pump came to be cancelled.
2 When the matter came up for admission hearing, on 19th March 2008, this Court [Coram: C.K. Buch, J.] passed the following order:
?SHeard the learned advocate Mr.Jani.
Notice as to interim relief returnable on 8th April, 2008. Direct service is permitted.
The notice has been issued in view of the fact that the petitioner is ready to abide by any reasonable condition that may be imposed by the Court and in the background of the anticipated need of the Railways for expansion project. The respondent no.3 Company may also perhaps agree with the conditions that may be imposed by the Court while passing appropriate further orders in the matter.??
3 Thereafter,on 11th September 2008, this Court [Coram: Anant S. Dave, J.] passed the following order:
?SLearned advocate for the Railways to seek instructions from the higher authority as to whether it is possible and permissible to continue the petitioner on the land subject to his filing a proper undertaking that in future, for whatever reason, he may not claim or file any case against the Railway for either compensation or damages.
S.O to 6th October, 2008.??
4 Today, Mr. Bipin I. Mehta, learned counsel appearing for the Railway Authority, has produced on record copies of the letter dated 29th September 2008 addressed by the Divisional Engineer [North], Western Railway, Ahmedabad, to him and another letter dated 1st October 2008 addressed by the Divisional Engineer [North], Western Railway, Ahmedabad, to M/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited, by which, the Authority has decided as under:
?SEarlier the proposed alignment of DFCC was planned paralleled to existing Railway Track between Mehsana and Palanpur. However, due to space constraints at Unjha and Sidhpur, now the proposed alignment of DFC is planned on detour from Nadiad to Palanpur. In view of the above, the DFCCIL has no objection in issuing the NOC to the proposal In view of the above clarification of DFCCIL, that proposed alignment of DFC has changed, detour from Nadiad to Palanpur, and looking to the fact that DFCCIL has given clearance to another proposal of NOC at same station i.e. Unjha, the decision to cancel the NOC given to petitioner has since been dropped, and the petitioner can continue to make construction as per the terms of NOC granted by Railway to him, and subject to provisions of undertaking already executed by him for this purpose. The petitioner can file the additional undertaking, as suggested by Hon'ble Court also.??
4.1 Copies of of the aforesaid two letters dated 29th September 2008 and dated 1st October 2008 are ordered to be taken on record.
5 In view of the above, the NOC in question stands good and the petitioner is permitted to carry on construction as per the terms of the NOC granted by Railway to him, and subject to provisions of undertaking already executed by him for this purpose.
6 Hence, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this petition at this stage. Permission is granted. This petition stands disposed of as withdrawn. Notice is discharged with no order as to costs.
(ANANT S. DAVE, J.) (swamy) Top