Gujarat High Court High Court

Maheshbhai vs Collector on 19 March, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Maheshbhai vs Collector on 19 March, 2010
Author: H.K.Rathod,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/11381/2009	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11381 of
2009 
=========================================================

 

MAHESHBHAI
JAYANTIBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

COLLECTOR
- GANDHINAGAR & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
VM PANCHOLI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 
Ms. Vandana Bhatt, AGP for Respondent(s) :
1, 
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE H.K.RATHOD
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 19/03/2010 

 

ORAL
ORDER

Heard
learned Advocate Mr. VM Pancholi for petitioner and learned AGP Ms.
Vandana Bhatt for respondent State Authority. Notice issued by this
Court to respondent No.2,3 has been served but respondents no.2,3
have not appeared before this Court and no affidavit in reply is
filed by said respondents.

Petitioner
is praying in paragraph 15(B) of this petition to direct respondents
no.1 and 3 to recover amount as mentioned in recovery certificate
dated 14th November, 2008 issued by Labour Court, Kalol
from respondent no.2 and direct respondent no.1 to remit said amount
in office of Labour Court, Kalol.

Today,
affidavit in reply has been filed by respondent no.1 on record and
copy thereof has been served to learned Advocate Mr. VM Pancholi for
petitioner. Stand taken by respondent no.1 is that after receiving
certificate dated 14th November, 2008, Collector office,
Gandhinagar has forwarded said recovery certificate to TDO Kalol to
recover same as property is situated in rural area, by letter dated
11th May, 2009 and, therefore, necessary order is
required to be passed against concerned TDO and DDO.

I
have considered submissions made by both learned advocates as well
as averments made in reply filed on behalf of respondent no.1.
Keeping in mind fact fact that property of respondent is situated in
rural area, therefore, it is within power of District Development
Officer concerned to recover said amount as mentioned in recovery
certificate issued by Labour Court, Kalol in favour of District
Collector, Gandhinagar. Therefore, it is directed to District
Development Officer, District Panchayat Gandhinagar to recover
amount as mentioned in recovery certificate dated 14th
November, 2008 from respondent no.2 while taking and initiating
appropriate steps as required under the Bombay Land Revenue Code and
complete this exercise within period of two months from date of
receiving copy of this order. After recovering amount from
respondent no.2, same is required to be deposited before Labour
Court, Kalol, to be communicated to petitioner. In view of these
observations and directions, this petition is disposed of
accordingly. Direct Service is Permitted.

(H.K.

Rathod,J.)

Vyas

   

Top