Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.35 seconds)

Keshubhai Virbhanbhai Vala vs The Special Secretary (Appeals) ... on 26 April, 2022

9.2 Since the submission made by Mr. Kavina, learned Senior Advocate that if the respondent No.5 wants the land in question for completion of their project, in that case respondent No.5 should negotiate with the petitioner, Mr. Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General submitted that as per the petitioner at no point of time even if he is believed to be the holder of the land on the basis of `santhani' throughout cannot be said to be absolute owner of the land in question, and therefore, he cannot negotiate the land, as the said land is vest with the Government, and therefore, there is no question of negotiating with the petitioner. 9.3 Mr. Kamal Trivedi, learned Advocate General took this Court to the order dated 25.3.1969 whereby the land was allotted to the father of the petitioner on `santhani' basis. Learned Advocate General submitted that allotment of land on `santhani' basis was subject to certain conditions. The petitioner was Page 70 of 119 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 26 21:27:49 IST 2022 C/SCA/11744/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022 required to pay the occupancy price within a specified period mentioned in the order itself. In the instant case, since the father of the petitioner failed to comply with the aforesaid conditions the land was shown in the name of the Government in the revenue record. Learned Advocate General further submitted that the land in question was not allotted to respondent No.5 as it could not be acquired on account of encroachment on the land by private persons and not by considering the merit of the matter. Learned Advocate General further relying upon the Letter of Intent dated 25.4.2008 and submitted that the Letter of Intent was issued in favour of respondent No.5 as back as in the year 2008 and in 2008 as per the revenue record, the land was running in the name of Government. It is on 13.1.2011 during the Vibrant Gujarat, a Memorandum of Understanding was arrived at between respondent Nos.5 and 6 and pursuant to the aforesaid Memorandum of Understanding, respondent No.6 requested the authority to acquire the land for the purpose of respondent No.5. Learned Advocate General drew attention of the Court to the application for Page 71 of 119 Downloaded on : Tue Apr 26 21:27:49 IST 2022 C/SCA/11744/2021 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 26/04/2022 acquisition of land in Chhara and Sarkhadi villages made by the Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Gujarat Maritime Board to the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat vide application dated 15/17.10.2013.
Gujarat High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 0 - N S Desai - Full Document

Kiritkumar Jethalal Pandya vs The State Of Gujarat on 15 July, 2025

(i) All relevant aspects shall be considered, including the inclusion of the petitioner's name for benefits as per the judgment in Magan Arjanbhai Vegda versus State of Gujarat decided on 26.11.2024 in Civil Appeal No. 13185 of 2024, the provision of stepping up benefits for Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by MS.PARUL DUTTA(HCD0073) on Sat Jul 19 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:26:41 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/8685/2019 ORDER DATED: 15/07/2025 undefined the relevant period, and the payment of accrued interest.
Gujarat High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Harishchandra Dayalji Lad vs Director Of Agriculture on 4 December, 2025

16. At this stage, it would be apt to refer to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Maganbhai Arjanbhai Vegda vs. State of Gujarat and Others rendered in Special Civil Application No. Page 26 of 40 Uploaded by MR. DIWAKAR SHUKLA(HC01778) on Mon Dec 08 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Dec 10 21:55:56 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6268/2019 JUDGMENT DATED: 04/12/2025 undefined 12541 of 2011 and allied matter dated 28.11.2011 , wherein after taking note of almost identical factual situation and considering the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gurcharan Singh Grewal vs. Punjab State Electricity Board reported in (2009) 3 SCC 94, more particularly observed in paragraph 12 to 14 thereof, held thus:
Gujarat High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1