Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/11664/2009 1/ 4 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 11664 of 2009
===================================
MOHIUDDIN
JIVABHAI SANDHI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s)
===================================
Appearance :
MR
MOHSIN M PETIWALA for Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR. MENGDEY AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3.
===================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 11/01/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. By
way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and
order directing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to allot the land as per
the petitioner’s application and subsequent representation in
accordance with law and to quash and set aside the decision / letter
dated 3.5.2007 taken by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
2. It
is the case on behalf of the petitioner that petitioner that worked
as Soldier in the Indian Army and participated in the war between
India and Pakistan (Bangladesh war) in the year 1971-72. That he
applied for rehabilitation and to get the land at Village Gidaj, Tal:
Morbi as a Soldier. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that
though the application has submitted in the year 1992, the same was
not decided and petitioner was assured for the allotment of the land
bearing Survey No. 186/1 situated at Village Gidaj, Tal: Morbi i.e.
period between 1992 to 2007. That in the meantime, one another
Soldier Hussainbhai Ibrahimbhai Raoma similarly placed like the
petitioner was alloted the land at Rajkot. That by communication
dated 3.5.2007, respondent No.2 Deputy Collector informed the
petitioner that he is not eligible as per the policy of the State
Government as petitioner served as a Soldier only for five years and
few months and, therefore, petitioner will not be allotted the land.
It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that thereafter also the
petitioner made representation, however no reply has been received.
Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil
Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
allotment of land.
3. Shri
Sen, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has
vehemently submitted that the impugned decision rejecting the
application of the petitioner for allotment of the land as a Soldier
is ex-facie illegal and against the policy of the State
Government,more particularly, policy reflecting in Government
Resolution dated 15.2.1989. It is submitted that as per Clause
3(K)(2)(15) of the aforesaid Government Resolution dated 15.2.1989 it
is specifically provided that any soldier who has participated the
war with Pakistan will be given land for rehabilitation. It is
submitted that therefore, as petitioner was in service as Soldier in
the year 1972, when India had a war with the Pakistan, petitioner is
entitled to the land for rehabilitation as per the aforesaid policy/
Government Resolution. It is further submitted that even Gidaj
Village Panchayat also gave no objection if the land is allotted to
the petitioner, therefore, also the impugned decision deserves to be
quashed and set aside. No other submissions have been made.
4. Having
heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and considering the
impugned decision dated 3.5.2007 as well as Government Resolution
dated 15.2.1989, upon which much reliance has been placed, it cannot
be said that the decision rejecting the application of the petitioner
for allotment of land as a Soldier is in any way illegal and/ or
contrary to the policy of the State Government reflected in the
Government Resolution dated 15.1.1989. On reading the Government
Resolution as a whole soldier who has completed the service of 15
years in Army, is entitled for allotment of land under ex-army cadre.
It is an admitted position that petitioner worked only for five years
and few months and, therefore, petitioner is rightly held not
entitled for allotment of the land under ex-army cadre. So far as
clause No. 3(K)(2)(15) of the aforesaid Government Resolution dated
15.1.1989 upon which much reliance has been placed is concerned, the
same shall not be applicable in the present case as the said clause
will be applicable only in a case where a soldier / army person who
is native of State of Gujarat and whose services has been appreciated
/ who has been rewarded at the time taking part in the war against
the Pakistan is to be given preference while allotting the land in
question. The translation of the aforesaid provision which is at page
95 is not correct and true translation. Be that it may, in the
present case it is not the case on behalf of the petitioner that his
services has been appreciated and he has been rewarded while taking
part in the war against the Pakistan. Therefore, the claim of the
petitioner for allotment of the land relying upon the clause
3(K)(15)(2) is misplaced. Petitioner is not entitled to preference in
allotment of the land under clause 3(K)(15)(2) of the Government
Resolution dated 15.2.1989. Under the circumstances, the decision
dated 3.5.2007 rejecting the application of the petitioner for
allotment of land is absolutely in consonance with the policy of the
State Government reflecting the Government Resolution dated
15.2.1989, which is not required to be interfered with by this Court
in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
No case is made out to interfere with the impugned order.
5. In
view of the above, there is no substance in the present petition
which deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
(M.R.SHAH,
J.)
kaushik
Top