Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/952720/2008 1/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9527 of 2008
=========================================================
J
M BAXI & COMPANY - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
PR NANAVATI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR HUKAMSING, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1,
None
for Respondent(s) : 2 -
5.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 22/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Shri Premal Nanavati for the petitioner and learned
AGP Shri Hukamsing for the State on advance copy. At the joint
request of the learned advocates appearing for the parties, the
petition is taken up for final disposal today.
Case
of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been alloted certain
piece of land for his Support Services at Pipavav port on which the
petitioner proposes to construct go-down. In the meantime, however,
the petitioner received a notice dated 9.7.2008 from the Range
Forest Officer stating inter-alia that the petitioner occupies a
part of the forest land. The petitioner was given notice to produce
necessary materials before 16.7.2008 and he was called upon to
explain why such encroachment should not be removed.
In
response to the said notice, the petitioner prayed for time of one
month. By communication dated 17.7.2008, Range Forest Officer
conveyed to the petitioner that pursuant to communication received
from the Deputy Conservator of Forest, the petitioner is granted
five more days of extension. The petitioner has approached the Court
at this stage.
At
the outset as noted the petitioner has come to the Court when the
authority has issued only show cause notice and no final decision is
yet taken. However, grievance of the petitioner that extremely short
time is being granted deserves consideration.
Learned
advocate for the petitioner further submitted that the Mamlatdar
had prepared a map which clearly shows that the petitioner has not
encroached any part of the forest land. He further submitted that
the petitioner will also be willing to have fresh joint survey of
the exact position to ascertain whether any part of the forest land
is encroached. He also submitted that eventually if if is found
that the land allotted by the Revenue Department to the petitioner
occupies any part of the forest land, the petitioner may be granted
alternative land.
Under
the circumstances, the petition is disposed of giving following
directions :
1) Range
Forest Officer shall grant time to the petitioner upto 5.8.2008 to
file full representation.
2) It
will be open for the petitioner to place before the authority
material in support of his case.
3) If
the petitioner applies for joint survey, such request shall be
considered.
4) Ultimately,
if it is found that the petitioner has occupied any part of the
forest land, it will be open for the petitioner to approach the
Revenue Department for allotment of alternative or additional land.
Such request may be considered in accordance with law.
With
these directions, the petition is disposed of.
Direct
service is permitted.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(raghu)
Top