Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/18058/2006 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 18058 of 2006
======================================
SELF
EMPLOYED WOMEN'S ASSO. (SEWA) & 5 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT TRO' SECRETARY & 4 - Respondent(s)
======================================
Appearance :
MS.
INDIRA JAISINGH, Sr. Counsel with MR BHUSHAN B
OZA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 6.
MS. MANISHA LAVKUMAR, ASSISTANT
GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
RULE SERVED for
Respondent(s) : 1,4 - 5.
MR PRASHANT G DESAI for Respondent(s) :
2,
MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent(s) :
3,
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 17/11/2008
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN)
Heard
learned counsel for either side.
2. This
petition has been preferred by the organization named SEWA, seeking a
direction to the respondent Municipal Corporation to formulate a
scheme for accommodating the street vendors in various places in the
Ahmedabad city.
3.
Various orders have been passed by the Court in the past and it is
unnecessary to refer to all those orders. However, we may refer to an
order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 29.11.2007,
wherein it was pointed out by the counsel appearing for the Municipal
Corporation as well as AUDA that they would examine the grievances
raised by this organization, and for that purpose they must first
have a meeting, to which learned counsel for the parties readily
agreed. Thereafter also when no progress was made in the matter,
petitioners filed a contempt petition stating that no meeting was
held as ordered by this Court on 29.11.2006. Yet another order was
passed on the contempt petition on 29.6.2007, directing Corporation
to hold a meeting which was agreed by the counsel appearing for the
Corporation as well.
4. We
noticed from the affidavit filed by the Corporation, especially
paragraph 18 that they have already prepared the plan, but the same
was not finalised though various meetings were held with the
representatives of the Association.
5. Learned
counsel appearing for the Corporation submitted that they are very
much concerned in the matter of framing a scheme for the benefit of
street vendors in the Ahmedabad city. Counsel appearing for the
petitioners submitted that even though on various occasions counsel
for the Corporation has stated that they will hold a meeting with the
representatives, no responsible officers are taking part in the
meeting and no effective meeting was conducted.
6.
In these facts and situation, we direct respondent Municipal
Corporation to hold a meeting within a period of 3 weeks from today
with the representative of the petitioners’ organization, and it is
open to the petitioners to express their grievance before the
Commissioner, and considering the grievances raised, he will prepare
a draft scheme and place it before the Standing Committee of the
Corporation.
Post
after a month.
(K.S.
Radhakrishnan, C.J.)
(Akil
Kureshi, J.)
*/Mohandas
Top