Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/12469/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 12469 of 2010
In
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2388 of 2010
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10139 of 2008
With
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 2388 of 2010
In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION
No. 10139 of 2008
=========================================================
AHMEDABAD
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION THRO' MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER & 1 -
Petitioner(s)
Versus
GOLDEN
COMMERCIAL CENTRE OWNERS ASSOCIATION THROUGH & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
M/S
RJ RAWAL ASSOC.
for
MR RITESH K SONI for Petitioners
None for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE ANANT S. DAVE 19th October 2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per :
HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
This
Application has been preferred by the petitioner-Corporation for
condonation of delay of 520 days in preferring the proposed Appeal
against the Order dated 19th January 2009 passed in S.C.A
No. 10139 of 2008. By the said Order, the learned Single Judge,
while issuing rule, passed ad interim order directing that if
the respondent-writ petitioner submits development plan for
construction of building over the land, the same shall be accepted by
the petitioner-Corporation, and the processing shall be made in
accordance with law, and shall not be denied on the ground that
acquisition proposal is pending u/s. 78 of the B.P.M.C Act. The
decision of the Corporation, if any, has been ordered to be placed on
record for sanctioning of the plan or otherwise.
In the
present case, as we find that ad interim order was passed by
the learned Single Judge and rule was made returnable on 18th
February 2009, we are of the view that instead of condoning delay for
entertaining the proposed Appeal against the interim order, it
would be desirable if the petitioner-Corporation is given liberty to
move before the learned Single Judge for disposal of the writ
petition viz., S.C.A No. 10139 of 2008 on merit and/or for
vacating ad interim order dated 19th January 2009,
as the case having not been taken up for hearing even after one year
and eight months from the date, the rule was made returnable. In such
case, the learned Single Judge is expected to hear the case on merit
and/or to take up the petition for vacating the stay which may be
decided in accordance with law. Both C.A and proposed L.P.A stand
disposed of.
{S.J
Mukhopadhaya, CJ.}
{Anant
S. Dave, J.}
Prakash*
Top