Gujarat High Court High Court

Ramlal vs State on 25 October, 2010

Gujarat High Court
Ramlal vs State on 25 October, 2010
Author: Ks Jhaveri,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/12283/2010	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12283 of 2010
 

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


 

RAMLAL
SOHANJI SUTHAR HOUSE NO. 126 & 17 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

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

=========================================================
 
Appearance : 
MR
SP MAJMUDAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 18.MR PP MAJMUDAR for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 18. 
MR
RASHESH RINDANI AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent(s) : 2, 
MR
PRASHANT DESAI WITH MR KAUSHAL D PANDYA for Respondent(s) :
3, 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 25/10/2010 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1.0 By
way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for direction
directing the respondent authorities not to deviate/vary from the
sanctioned development plan dated 02.09.2004 without following due
procedure of law and also prayed to restrain the respondent
authorities from demolishing the residential house of the present
petitioners situated at Block No. 505, Village Dindoli, Taluka:
Choryasi, District: Surat which is not covered in the road of 45
meters in the above finalized plan.

2.0 When
the matter is taken up for hearing, Mr. Prashant Desai, learned
appearing with Mr. Pandya, learned advocate appearing for respondent
No.3 has stated that the Corporation will take action in accordance
with law. In that view of the matter, the petition stands disposed of
with direction that the Corporation will take appropriate action in
accordance with law. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the action
of the Corporation, it will be open for them to challenge the same.
With the above observation, petition stands disposed of. Subject to
the above, notice is discharged with no order as to costs. Interim
relief, if any, stands vacated.

(K.S.JHAVERI,
J.)

niru*

   

Top