Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/179720/2005 3/ 3 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 1797 of 2005
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To
be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge?
=========================================================
TULSIDAS
H. THAKKAR (SINCE DECD.) - Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
YV VAGHELA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR ASHISH M
DAGLI for Respondent(s) :
1,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 19/03/2009
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. By
way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate Writ, direction and/or
order quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 24.01.2005
passed below Exh.4 in Eviction Appeal No.72 of 2004 as well as order
dated 31.05.2004 passed in Eviction Case No.32 of 1984.
2. It
is not in dispute that there is no valid license in favour of the
petitioner and therefore, the petitioner has no right to continue to
occupy stall. Be that as it may. Mr.Ashish Dagli, learned Advocate
appearing on behalf of the respondent Corporation has stated at
the Bar that fresh tenders are already invited in which the
petitioner has also participated and submitted his offer and final
decision is to be taken by the respondent Corporation.
3. Mr.Vaghela,
learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted
that let the Corporation take appropriate decision on the basis of
offers already received by them and till then the petitioner be
continued to occupy the stall. It is submitted that if ultimately it
is found that somebody else is the highest offerer for stall and
license is given to somebody else, in that case, the petitioner shall
vacate the stall within a period of 2 (two) weeks thereafter. Let the
petitioner file Undertaking to the aforesaid effect within a period
of 10 (ten) days from today.
4. In
view of above, present Special Civil Application is disposed of by
directing the respondent Corporation to complete entire process
of allotment of stall and take appropriate decision within a period
of 4(four) weeks from today positively and without fail. Until then
the petitioner is permitted to occupy the stall without any right
whatsoever in favour of the petitioner; only by way of interim
arrangement and till final decision is taken by the respondent
Corporation within stipulated time as stated herein above. If
ultimately it is found that the petitioner is not the highest offerer
and somebody else is found to be highest offerer and stall is alloted
to some other person, in that case, the petitioner shall vacate the
stall and hand over peaceful and vacant possession to the respondent
Corporation within a period of 2(two) thereafter. Necessary
Undertaking to be filed by the petitioner that he will hand over
peaceful and vacant possession of the stall to the respondent
Corporation within a period of 2(two) weeks from final decision (in
case the petitioner is not found highest offerer) within a period of
10(ten) days, failing which interim protection given to the
petitioner shall stand vacated automatically. With these, present
Special Civil Application is disposed of.
[M.R.Shah,J.]
satish
Top