Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
CA/4033/2010 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CIVIL
APPLICATION - FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY No. 4033 of 2010
With
MISC.
CIVIL APPLICATION NO.972 OF 2010
=========================================================
KASHIRAM
KALYANBHAI VASAVA & 23 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
BHAVIKABEN
BHASKARBHAI DARJI & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
VIJAY H NANGESH for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 24.
None for Respondent(s)
: 1 - 2.
MR NIKUNT RAVAL AGP for Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE Z.K.SAIYED
Date : 23/04/2010
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI)
1. The
applicant, by way of this Civil application has prayed to condone the
delay of 173 days caused in filing the captioned Misc. Civil
Application.
2. Heard
learned counsel for the applicant. This Court on 30.09.2009 had
passed the following order.
By
way of this application, the petitioner has prayed for to remove the
illegal construction in survey no. 620, 639 and 640 Bopad, Vadodara
wherein illegal construction has been carried out by the occupants
contrary to the layout plan sanctioned by the corporation.
Heard the petitioner- party in person.
Reply is filed by the Corporation. However keeping in mind the
avernments made in the application and the fact that the
Petitioner-Party in person is required to come from Vadodara every
time, we direct the Corporation to verify the construction, whether
it is as per the lay out plan sanctioned by the corporation or not,
and if it is found illegal then they will direct the concerned
parties to remove illegal construction or else they will remove the
illegal construction, in accordance with law within a period of 4
months from today.
With
above direction, this petition, stands disposed of. Subject to above,
notice is discharged. No order as to costs.
3. Looking
to the facts of the case and in view of the aforesaid order, the
applicant ought to have prefer an application for modification of the
said order, earlier and not at the time when the order for demolition
is passed by the respondent -Corporation. Thus, under these
circumstances, we are of the opinion that it will not be proper for
this Court to entertain this application at this stage. However, it
will be open for the applicant to challenge the order of demolition
passed by the respondent-Corporation by filing an application before
the appropriate authority.
4. In
view of the above, both the Civil Application and Misc. Civil
Application stand disposed of. However, at this stage, learned
counsel for the applicant requested to grant stay of the order of
demolition passed by the respondent-Corporation. The said request is
rejected on the ground that since the applications are not
entertained, there is no question of grant of any protection.
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.]
[Z.K.
SAIYED, J.]
/phalguni/
Top