Gujarat High Court High Court

Nitin vs State on 13 August, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Nitin vs State on 13 August, 2010
Author: M.R. Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/4310/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4310 of 2010
 

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


 

NITIN
CHANDRAKANT KAKKAD - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
MP SHAH for
Petitioner(s) : 1,                                                   
                              MS. KRUTI M SHAH for Petitioner(s) :
1, 
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. 
MR PR NANAVATI for Respondent(s) :
3, 
=========================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/08/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. By
way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, order of direction
directing the respondents to grant alternative space as stated in the
representation dated 02/11/2009 in lieu of the land of which the
petitioner is the owner, which was taken by the respondents for
widening of the public street on Raiya road, Rajkot.

2. In
response to the notice issued by this Court, affidavit-in-reply is
filed on behalf of the Corporation pointing out that as per the
policy of the Corporation in lieu of the land, which is taken away
for the purpose of widening of the road, either some additional space
is to be given or additional FSI is to be given and so far as the
petitioner is concerned, the petitioner is already given additional
FSI, which the petitioner has utilised and has put up the
construction and,therefore, now the petitioner cannot be given
additional FSI in lieu of the land, which is used for the purpose
of widening of the road.

3. Under
the circumstances, as per the policy, the petitioner has been given
additional FSI, and,therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to
additional space. Hence, the present petition deserves to be
dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.

(M.R.

SHAH, J.)

siji

   

Top