Gujarat High Court High Court

Umraobibi vs Prantij on 5 September, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Umraobibi vs Prantij on 5 September, 2011
Author: Akil Kureshi,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/21978/2005	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 21978 of 2005
 

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

 

UMRAOBIBI
WD/O MEHUBUMIYA HEBATKHAN SUMRA & 9 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

PRANTIJ
NAGARPALIKA THRO' CHIEF OFFICER & 1 - Respondent(s)
 

==============================================================
Appearance
: 
MR
SK BUKHARI for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 10. 
MR JV JAPEE for Respondent(s) : 1, 
NOTICE
SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) :
2, 
=====================================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 13/02/2006 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. In
response to the Notice, learned Advocate Mr. Jaypee appearing for
Prantij Nagarpalika submitted that the impugned Resolution passed by
the Prantij Municipal Bureau is only authorizing the Officers of the
Municipal Bureau to initiate action for categorizing the land bearing
Survey No. 980 admeasuring 2 hectors as Gamtal land. He submitted
that for the said purpose, proposal has been made to the State
Government. So far no final decision has been taken by the competent
authority in this regard. He further submitted that there is no
cause of action for filing the present petition.

2. Considering
the above submissions the petition is disposed of by providing that
if the Pranjit Muncipal Bureau approaches the competent authority
under the State Government for categorizing the land in question as
Gamtal land, the petitioners will have an opportunity of making
representation to such proposal. For the above purpose, the
Municipal Bureau shall intimate to petitioner No.1 on behalf of all
the petitioners of such development. If any of the petitioners makes
representation raising objections to such proposal, the authority
will consider the same before taking any final decision. With these
directions, the petition is disposed of. Notice discharged.

[Akil
Kureshi, J.]

satishcv

   

Top