Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/14664/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 14664 of 2008
=========================================
GAGAN
S SETHI, MEMBER,
SPECIAL
MONITORING GROUP & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 5 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
AMIT PANCHAL, ADVOCATE with MS. SHIVANI
RAJPUROHIT for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MR KAMAL TRIVEDI, ADVOCATE
GENERAL with MS. S.K. VISHEN, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
MR PS CHAMPANERI, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
for Respondent(s) : 4,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 5 -
6.
MRS VD NANAVATI for Respondent(s) :
5,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 23/04/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA)
Ms.
V.D. Nanavati, counsel for respondent No.5 submits that the families
displaced will be allotted plots and will be paid compensation to the
tune of Rs. 5,000/- to each family for construction of new shelter,
within one week.
Learned
counsel for the petitioners submits that the compensation to which
the families are entitled as per Government of India, Ministry of
Home Affair’s decision dated 27.4.2007 has not been paid, nor the
order to provide benefit to persons as per Government of India
decision dated 4th May, 2008 has been complied with by
the State.
Mr. Champaneri, counsel appearing for the Union of India submits that
Central Government has released fund in favour of the State for
payment of compensation.
In
the facts and circumstances, we direct the respondents to file their
respective affidavits showing compliance with regard to settlement of
land, payment of compensation of Rs. 5,000/-, payment of compensation
in terms of Government of India decision dated 27.4.2007 and steps if
any, taken pursuant to Government of India decision dated 14.5.2007,
for providing employment/or pensionary benefit to those who have left
jobs due to riots and crossed age of super-annuation.
Let
copy of this order be handed over to Ms. V.D. Nanavati, counsel for
the Corporation, Advocate General and Assistant Solicitor General.
Post
the matter on 17.6.2010 in the 1st Board.
Pendency
of this case does not stand in the way of the respondents to provide
the benefits as noticed above.
(S.J.Mukhopadhaya,
C.J.)
(Akil
Kureshi, J.)
*/Mohandas
Top