Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/10969/2009 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10969 of 2009
=========================================================
THAKOR
KALAJI AMTHAJI, SARPANCH & 7 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
JV JAPEE for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 8.
MR RASHESH RINDANI AGP for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3.
MR SANJAY M
AMIN for Respondent(s) :
4,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 31/08/2010
ORAL ORDER
By
way of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for the
following reliefs :-
(A) Your
Lordships be pleased to issue the writ of Mandamus or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to quash and set
aside the impugned Notification dated 11.9.2009 issued by the State
of Gujarat, Revenue Department, excluding certain Survey numbers of
lands from the limits of Village Agalod and including the same in the
limits of Village Jepur, without following the mandatory requirement
of consultation under Section 7 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1993.
(B) Your
Lordships be pleased to stay the implementation, execution and
operation of the impugned Notification dated 11.9.2009 issued by the
State of Gujarat, Revenue Department, pending the admission and final
disposal of the petition.
(C) Your
Lordships be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as may
be deemed fit in the interest of justice.
2. The
contention which has been raised by the petitioners is that the
procedure which was followed was in the year 2002 and the
Notification has come in 2009 and, therefore, the Court may exercise
discretionary power. In my opinion, in view of the facts set out in
the affidavit-in-reply dated 2.11.2009 and additional
affidavit-in-reply dated 7.4.2010, the procedure is followed and the
State has taken into consideration all the individual grounds and
grievances raised in the petition. Nothing is pointed out that the
notification was issued without following the procedure.
3. The
second contention regarding allocation of the land disproportionate
to the area of the village is concerned, it will be open for the
petitioners to represent the same before the concerned authority.
4. With
the above observations, the petition stands disposed of. Notice is
discharged with no order as to costs.
(K.S.
JHAVERI, J.)
zgs/-
Top