Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/1591307/2007 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 15913 of 2007
=========================================================
PIRZADA
SAIYED BAHAUDDIN B KADRI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
UNION
OF INDIA & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MOHMEDSAIF HAKIM for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
MR HARIN P RAVAL for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.S.DAVE
Date
: 04/10/2007
ORAL
ORDER
This
petition is filed by the petitioner challenging the action of the
respondent in not permitting excess, reverence and performance of
religious activities to the petitioner and other followers and
devotees of the Dargah of Qutbuddin Mohemmedkhan, situated in village
Danteshwar, District Vadodara known as Hazira Alias Bada Hazira and
also challenges letter dated 19.10.2006 issued by respondent namely
Superintendent Archaeologist, Government of India whereby permission
is refused .
Shri
M.A.Khardi, learned advocate appearing for Mr.M.S.M.Hakim appearing
for the petitioner contended that there is no prohibition or
restriction in the The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and
Remains Act, 1958 and Rules, 1959, by which any restriction can be
put forth in performance of recognized religious usage or custom.
Learned
advocate further submits that when the petitioner wants to use
premise of the Dargah which is a protected monument for a period of
three days, the authority ought to have considered this.
Shri
Anshin Desai, learned Central Government Standing Counsel relies on
the affidavit filed by the respondent authority and submits that the
petitioner has not disclosed correct facts. Since the petitioner has
filed civil suit for similar relief before the learned Civil Judge,
Senior Division, Vadodara being Regular Civil Suit No.18/2007, this
petition for the same relief cannot be entertained. Learned counsel
further submits that even in this very Special Civil Application one
Civil Application No. 10986/2007 was preferred claiming similar
relief on the ground of performance of religious activities for some
other religious occasion came to be withdrawn. Besides, in a civil
proceedings were decree is passed in favour of the department of
Archeology whereby the petitioner is already restrained and in the
second appeal preferred by the petitioner before this Court no relief
is granted and there also Civil Application came to be rejected.
According to him so far as year 2007 is concerned and the relief
claimed therein no application is received by the competent authority
yet and under the above circumstances no relief can be granted.
Having
heard learned counsels for the parties at this stage prima facie in
view of rejections of earlier Civil Application in Special Civil
Application as well as in the second appeal by learned Single Judge
of this Court on different occasions, I do not find any justification
to grant any interim relief. Even otherwise also for seeking similar
relief Civil Suit No.18/2007 is pending before learned Civil Judge,
Senior Division, Vadodara. This parallel proceedings in the form of
writ petition cannot be entertained.
No
case is made out for interim relief.
Stand
over to 18th October, 2007.
[ANANT
S. DAVE, J.]
//smita//
Top