Gujarat High Court High Court

Patel vs Special on 13 May, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Patel vs Special on 13 May, 2011
Author: V. M. G.B.Shah,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/5626/2011	 2/ 2	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 5626 of 2011
 

 
 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI 

 

 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
 
 
=================================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

1
		
		 
			 

Whether
			Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

2
		
		 
			 

To
			be referred to the Reporter or not ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

3
		
		 
			 

Whether
			their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

4
		
		 
			 

Whether
			this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
			interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
			made thereunder ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

5
		
		 
			 

Whether
			it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
		
	

 

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

PATEL
BHIKHABHAI MANGALDAS & 1 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SPECIAL
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

================================================= 
Appearance
: 
MR AJ PATEL for Petitioner(s) :
1 - 2. 
None for Respondent(s) : 1, 3, 
Mr N J Shah,
Asstt.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=================================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

and
		
	
	 
		 
			 

 

			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/05/2011 

 

ORAL
JUDGMENT

(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. M. SAHAI)

1. The
learned AGP has raised preliminary objection that this writ petition
is not maintainable as the petitioners have remedy either in filing
appeal challenging the impugned order or by way of filing First
Appeal but the writ petition is not maintainable under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India.

2. We
have heard Mr A.J. Patel, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr
N.J. Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondents No.1
and 2. We are of the opinion that this writ petition is not
maintainable as remedy is available to the petitioners either to file
Revision Application or to file Appeal. This petition is dismissed
on the ground of alternative remedy with liberty to the petitioners
to approach appropriate legal forum.

[V.

M. SAHAI, J.]

[G.

B. SHAH, J.]

msp

   

Top