Gujarat High Court High Court

Jivabhai vs State on 20 April, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Jivabhai vs State on 20 April, 2011
Author: Mr.S.J.Mukhopadhaya,&Nbsp;Mr.Justice J.B.Pardiwala,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

LPA/467/2011	 3/ 3	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 467 of 2011
 

In
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8614 of 2010
 

With


 

CIVIL
APPLICATION No. 3302 of 2011
 

In
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL No. 467 of 2011
 

 
=========================================================

 

JIVABHAI
SAVABHAI PARMAR & 1 - Appellant(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
 
Appearance
: 
MR
ANKIT Y BACHANI for
Appellant(s) : 1 - 2. 
MRS KRINA CALLA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 20/04/2011 

 

ORAL
ORDER

(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA)

The
appellants (Jivabhai Savabhai Parmar and Ishwarbhai Talsibhai Parmar)
jointly applied for quarry lease. The application made on 13th
June 2005 was not accepted in view of the adverse remarks given by
the District Collector on 16th May 2006 and 31st
March 2009. The revision application, having also rejected, the writ
petition was preferred, which was also dismissed by the learned
Single Judge.

We
have heard learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record.

It
will be evident that the second appellant Ishwarbhai Talsibhai
Parmar, who was having a quarry lease at Nizampura, Taluka –
Vadgam, District Banaskantha in respect to the building stone mines
and as the said Ishwarbhai Talsibhai Parmar committed unauthorized
work on quarry, for which he was imposed with penalty of
Rs.36,600=00. Having noticed the said past conduct of Ishwarbhai
Talsibhai Parmar and the fact that now he intends to have a quarry
lease along with first appellant Jivabhai Savabhai Parmar, a person
who is not having sound financial position, the authorities refuse to
grant quarry lease. In this background, we are not inclined to
interfere with the said order or the orders passed by the learned
Single Judge.

However,
this order shall not stand in the way of the appellants to approach
the authorities as per observation made by this Court on 9th
February 2011 in Letters Patent Appeal No.2393 of 2010, if not yet
moved.

The
Appeal and the Civil Application both are dismissed. No cost.

(S.J.Mukhopadhaya,
CJ.)

(J.B.Pardiwala,
J.)

/moin

   

Top