Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

[A]   That   the   Hon'ble   Court   may   be  pleased to admit this petition.
[B]   That   the   Hon'ble   Court   may   be  pleased   to   allow   this   Special   Civil  Application   by   issuing   an   appropriate  writ,   order   or   direction   to   the  respondent   authority   in   turn   to   take  appropriate   action   in   view   of   the  issuance of notices at Annexure­G dated  9.11.2011,   12.3.2012   and   21.4.2012   and  as   per   the   assurance   given   in   Swagat   On­line   Karyakram   by   Chief   Officer   of  Nagarpalika   on   26.4.2012   at   Annexure­J  in   the   facts   and   circumstances   of   the  present case in reference to the common  plot No.1 [survey No.391 Chhaya] in the  facts and circumstances of the case and  in the interest of justice.

With these observations, the petition stands  disposed of. 

Direct Service is permitted." 

4. The   said   order   takes   care   of   the   whole   factual  matrix.     It   appears   from   the   record   that   the  petitioner   is   member   of   a   plotted   society   as  averred in the petition and has objection to the  construction which is made in the common plot. It  is   the   case   of   Mr.Sanghvi,   learned   counsel  appearing   for   the   petitioner   that   the   orders  passed by this Court is partly implemented.  The  record   indicates   that   on   29.11.2014,   the  encroachment was removed, which according to the  petitioner is part­implementation of the earlier  order.     It   also   appears   from   the   record   that  HC-NIC Page 4 of 6 Created On Sat Jan 14 00:41:00 IST 2017 pursuant to the order dated 24.06.2013 passed by  this   Court   in   SCA   No.14548/12,   the   Nagarpalika  issued a notice under the relevant provisions of  the   Gujarat   Municipalities   Act,   1963   on  27.07.2013.   As pointed out by Mr. Sanghvi, the  same   was   subject   matter   of   Civil   Suit   and  ultimately, even further appeal being Misc. Civil  Appeal   No.19/14   at   the   stage   of   interim  injunction   wherein   also   the   appellant   Court   has  directed   the   authorities   to   comply   with   the  directions   issued   by   this   Court.     It   is  thereafter   that   the   petitioner   again   approached  this   Court   wherein   the   aforesaid   order   was  passed.

5. Mr. Raval, learned AGP has produced for perusal  of   this   Court   the   report   submitted   by   the  Collector,   Porbandar,   which   is   based   on   a  panchnama   dated   12.01.2017.     On   perusal   of   the  same, which also includes the report submitted by  the   Mamlatdar,   Porbandar,   shows   that   some  encroachment   has   been   removed   from   the   common  plot.   The papers shown by the learned AGP also  includes   the   further   report   of   Mamlatdar,  Porbandar dated 08.11.2016, which recites that on  verification   by   the   City   Talati,   Chhaya,   the  illegal   construction   made   on   the   dwellings   of  pujari has been removed.

6. In light of the aforesaid therefore, on perusal  of the prayers prayed in the petition, the same  are   almost   repetition   of   the   earlier   prayers. 

Page 5 of 6

HC-NIC Page 5 of 6 Created On Sat Jan 14 00:41:00 IST 2017 However,   without   expressing   any   opinion   on  merits,   it   would   be   open   for   the   petitioner   to  point   out   to   the   District   Collector,   Porbandar,  if   any   encroachment   is   still   remaining   on   the  common   plot.     It   goes   without   saying   that   the  District   Collector   shall   adhere   to   the   earlier  directions issued by this Court.