Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/6366/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6366 of 2010
=========================================
PARMAR
BIPINKUMAR JIVANBHAI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
DEPUTY
SECRETARY (INQUIRY) & 6 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
ALPESH G DODIA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) : 1,3 -
4, 6.
MR PINAKIN M RAVAL for Respondent(s) : 2,
MR MITUL R
DESAI for Respondent(s) : 5,
MR NEERAJ SONI, AGP for Respondent(s) :
7
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 22/07/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. By
way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution
of India the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, order or
direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated
16/03/2010 passed by the learned revisional authority i.e the Officer
on Special Duty and Deputy Secretary (Inquiry) Panchayat, Rural
Housing and Rural Development Department, Sachivalaya, Gandhinagar by
which the learned revisional authority has quashed and set aside the
order passed by the District Development Officer, Gandhinagar dated
17/01/2007 by which development permission was granted in favour of
the petitioner.
2. It
appears that there is a dispute with respect to the identity of the
plot for which Civil Suit is pending between the parties i.e. Regular
Civil Suit No. 58/2008 pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Mansa and, therefore, it is submitted by the
learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner that instead
of cancelling/quashing and setting aside the development permission
granted by the District Development Officer dated 17/01/2007 the
learned revisional authority ought to have continued the said order
subject to the decision that may be taken by the Civil Court in the
aforesaid Civil Suit.
3. Shri
Mitul Desai, learned advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 5
has stated at the bar that if the aforesaid is considered, in that
case, the petitioner may take advantage of the order passed by the
District Development Officer dated 17/01/2007, and, therefore, it may
be clarified that the order passed by the District Development
Officer dated 17/01/2007 granting development permission shall be
subject to the decision that may be taken by the Civil Court and the
petitioner shall not take any advantage and/or disadvantage of the
aforesaid order in the pending suit. It is also further submitted
that till then as observed by the learned revisional authority in
paragraph 2, parties may be directed to maintain status-quo as per
the order passed in Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 30/2009 and/or the
order that may be passed by the learned appellate Court.
4. Shri
Dodia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has no
objection if the order passed by the District Development Officer,
Gandhinagar is modified to the aforesaid extent.
5. In
view of the above, the present Special Civil Application is disposed
of and the impugned order passed by the learned
revisional authority dated
16/03/2010 is modified to the extent that instead of quashing and
setting aside the order passed by the District Development Officer
dated 17/01/2007 it is directed to continue the order passed by the
District Development Officer dated 17/01/2007 granting development
permission in favour of the petitioner, however, the same shall be
subject to the ultimate outcome of the proceedings pending before the
Civil Court, being Regular Civil Suit No. 58/2008 and as agreed by
the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner,
petitioner shall not take advantage and/or disadvantage of the
aforesaid order passed by the District Development Officer dated
17/01/2007 and the aforesaid suit shall be decided and disposed of by
the learned trial Court on its own merits and on the basis of the
evidence led. Rest of the order passed by the learned revisional
authority, more particularly, paragraph 2 of the operative portion of
the order is not disturbed.
6. With
this, the present Special Civil Application is disposed of.
(M.R. SHAH, J.)
siji
Top