Dismissed

Lalji Khajuriyabhai Maheshwari v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC9 May 2018WPPIL/90/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This PIL challenged a land conversion order resulting in alleged encroachment. The Court held that since the petitioner withdrew a related Civil Application with liberty to approach authorities, they are not entitled to file a fresh PIL questioning the same proceedings. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed without any other relief or observation being made on the merits of the alleged encroachment.

Lalji Khajuriyabhai Maheshwari Vs State of Gujarat — Land Acquisition | Gujarat HC (2018)

¶1

C/WPPIL/90/2018 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 90 of 2018

¶4

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

¶5

LALJI KHAJURIYABHAI MAHESHWARI

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

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

¶9

Appearance:

¶10

MR K I KAZI(5030) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 10,11,12,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MR KM ANTANI, AGP(99) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1

¶11

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

¶12

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY and

¶13

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI

¶14

Date : 09/05/2018

¶15

ORAL ORDER

¶16

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. R.SUBHASH REDDY)

¶17

1.This writ petition is filed by way of
public interest litigation with the prayers which
read as under:

¶18

“(a) Be also pleased to quash and set aside
animpugnedorderNo.Land-N-A-A-Non
Agricultural-Akar-20-2488-06-07dated
13.07.2007 passed by Taluka Development
Officer, in the interest of justice.

¶19

(b) Be also pleased to direct the respondent
no.11 to remove encroachment on the
government land i.e.Gauchar Land as the same
is encroached by the respondent herein in
illegal manner.

¶20

(c) Be also pleased to direct the respondent
no.11tocarryoutrequisite
inquiry/investigation in connection with
illegalorderNo.Land-N-A-A-Non

¶21

Page 1 of 4

¶22

C/WPPIL/90/2018 ORDER

¶23

Agricultural-Akar-20-2488-06-07dated
13.07.2007 and take appropriate steps against
the responsible persons/officer, in the
interest of justice.

¶24

d) Grant any other relief/s as may deem fit
in the interest of justice.”

¶25

2.By office order dated 13.7.2007, the
Taluka Development Officer, Bhuj, Kutch district
has passed orders granting permission for
conversion of land bearing survey no.312/P1,
312/P2, 313/1, 313/3 P1, 313/3 P2, 315/2 paiki to
non-agricultural purpose. Aggrieved by the said
order, the petitioner herein has carried the
matter by way of revision before the Special
Secretary, Revenue Department who confirmed the
order dated 13.7.2007, by passing an order dated
10.8.2017. Further, the said order is challenged
before this Court in Special Civil Application
No.22801 of 2017. By an order dated 30.1.2018,
the said petition was withdrawn by seeking
liberty to file appropriate application before
the authority. The order dated 30.1.2018 reads as
under:

¶26

“Heard Mr.Jabuwala, learned advocate for
Mr.Kazi, learned advocate for the petitioner
and Mr.Shirish Gohil, learned AGP for the
respondents.

¶27

On instructions, Mr.Jabuwala does not press
this petition with a liberty to file
appropriateapplicationbeforethe
authorities. It is clarified that this Court
has not gone into the merits. The petition is
disposed of accordingly. D.S.Permitted.”

¶28

Page 2 of 4

¶29

C/WPPIL/90/2018 ORDER

¶30

3.During the course of hearing, it is
fairly submitted by learned counsel for the
petitioner that in view of the liberty granted to
the petitioner in the order dated 30.1.2018, the
petitioner has not filed any representation
before the authority. Having pursued by way of
SpecialCivilApplication,withouta

¶31

representation, again this petition is filed by
way of Public Interest Litigation. It is the
allegation of the petitioner that under the guise
of the order dated 13.7.2007 for conversion of
land from agricultural to non-agricultural
purpose, private respondents herein have
encroached upon the gaucher land.

¶32

4.If there is any encroachment, that can
be examined by this Court but not at the instance
of the petitioner who has already questioned the
order dated 13.7.2007 by way of revision before
the Special Secretary, Revenue Department and
also in Special Civil Application No.22801 of
2017. In any event, having challenged the order
dated 13.7.2007 as confirmed by the revisional
authority by way of filing Special Civil
Application and said Special Civil Application
was withdrawn by giving liberty to file
representation, the petitioner is not entitled to
question the very same proceedings by way of
Public Interest Litigation. As the liberty has

¶33

Page 3 of 4

¶34

C/WPPIL/90/2018 ORDER

¶35

already been granted in the order dated
30.1.2018, we are not inclined to make any
further observation in the matter. Accordingly,
this writ petition is dismissed.

¶36

(R.SUBHASH REDDY, CJ)

¶37

(VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J)

¶38

SRILATHA

¶39

Page 4 of 4

Lalji Khajuriyabhai Maheshwari v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lalji Khajuriyabhai Maheshwari v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shivam H Thakkar S/O Harshadbhai Thakkar Vs State of Gujarat

Vidhi Rajesh Shah D/O Rajesh Shah Vs State of Gujarat

Keyur Kumar S/O Bhavikbhai Rawal Vs State of Gujarat

Yogesh Ishwarlal Patel Vs Union of India

Joshi Milankumar Ashvinbhai Vs State of Gujarat

Bharat Haribhai Bariya Vs Shri N S Yadav