Disposed

Rti Activist Sangathan v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC25 Feb 2020WPPIL/159/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Gujarat disposed of a PIL concerning rampant unauthorized constructions and delays by the Town Planning Committee. The Court directed the Town Planning Committee to decide on the petitioner's representation within eight weeks, communicate the decision, and remove offending constructions within two months if found, ensuring statutory procedures and basic opportunities are followed.

What did the court decide?

Direction to Town Planning Committee to decide on pending representation within eight weeks, communicate decision, and remove offending constructions within two months if found, following statutory pr

Rti Activist Sangathan Vs State of Gujarat — Public Procurement and Tenders | Gujarat HC (2020)

¶1

C/WPPIL/159/2018 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 159 of 2018

¶4

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

¶5

RTI ACTIVIST SANGATHAN

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT & 4 other(s)

¶8

========================================================= Appearance:

¶9

MR HASHIM QURESHI(1097) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR. EKRAMA H QURESHI(7000) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 for the Opponent(s) No. 2,3,4 MS NISHA THAKORE AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1 MR AMAR D MITHANI(484) for the Opponent(s) No. 5

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIKRAM NATH

¶12

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI

¶13

Date : 25/02/2020

¶14

ORAL ORDER

¶15

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. VIKRAM NATH)

¶16

We have heard Shri Hasim Qureshi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Siraj Gori, advocate for Shri Amar Mithani, learned counsel representing respondent no.5 and Ms. Nisha Thakore, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State – respondents.

¶17

The grievance of the petitioner, who claims to be RTI activist and also working for a charitable trust, is that there is rampant growth of unauthorized constructions, not only without

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

C/WPPIL/159/2018 ORDER

¶20

sanctioned building plans, but also on public lands reserved for public purpose and despite the petitioner and his association and trust having repeatedly represented to the competent authorities, no decision is being taken nor any action is being taken to curb the said menace. It is also the case of the petitioner that at times, respondent would just issue notice to the person raising unauthorized constructions and thereafter, would not follow it nor bring it to the logical conclusion.

¶21

On the other hand, Shri Siraj Gori, learned counsel for respondent no. 5 placed before us a Resolution of the Town Planning Committee meeting held on 16.01.2020, according to which, the matter was discussed and thereafter kept for consideration in the next meeting. He further submits that appropriate decision would be taken shortly and whatever the decision is taken, would be equally well and effectively implemented.

¶22

On the other hand, Shri Qureshi, submits that this is delaying tactics being adopted by the Town Planning Committee for the last several years and they take up the matter only to adjourn it for the next meeting and for years the same exercise is

¶23

Page 2 of 4

¶24

C/WPPIL/159/2018 ORDER

¶25

going on.

¶26

Having considered the submissions and having perused the material on record, we are of the view that ends of justice would be best served by disposing of this petition with a direction to respondent no. 5 to take appropriate decision, strictly in accordance with law, on the pending representation of the petitioner, one of them filed as Annexure-E dated 01.01.2018 within a period of eight (8) weeks and communicate the said decision to the petitioner by Speed Post or by personal service. We further direct that the decision so taken if finds that there are offending constructions, then the same would be removed strictly in accordance with law within a period of two months, until and unless there is any legal impediment which restrict respondent no. 5 from proceeding further.

¶27

We also make it clear that whatever basic opportunity is required under the Act would be extended to all the unauthorized occupants and the decision would not be taken in haste and will follow the statutory provisions, strictly in accordance with law.

¶28

With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed

¶29

Page 3 of 4

¶30

C/WPPIL/159/2018 ORDER

¶31

of.

¶32

Direct Service is permitted.

¶33

(VIKRAM NATH, CJ)

¶34

(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J)

¶35

/phalguni/

¶36

Page 4 of 4

Rti Activist Sangathan v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rti Activist Sangathan 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

State of Gujarat Vs Kanjibhai Nagjibhai Desai

State of Gujarat Vs Kanjibhai Nagjibhai Desai

Sukhabhai Bhagwanbhai Patel Vs State of Gujarat

State of Gujarat Vs Rafik Hajibhai Parmar

The Gujarat Labour Court Judicial Officers' Association Vs State of Gujarat

Girishchandra J Dave Vs State of Gujarat