Disposed

Mafatlal Jesangbhai Vaghela v. State of Gujarat

Gujarat HC24 Mar 2021SCA/5308/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a special civil application, the petitioner challenged alleged encroachment on a village burial ground. The court directed the Collector to issue notices to the petitioner and all interested parties, permit personal hearings, and decide the representations within six weeks. The court also permitted service and reserved contention rights of interested parties.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Collector to issue notices, provide personal hearing, and decide the matter in six weeks.

Mafatlal Jesangbhai Vaghela Vs State of Gujarat — Writ and Judicial Review | Gujarat HC (2021)

¶1

C/SCA/5308/2021 ORDER

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

¶3

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5308 of 2021

¶4

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

¶5

MAFATLAL JESANGBHAI VAGHELA

¶6

Versus

¶7

STATE OF GUJARAT

¶8

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

¶9

MR MB RANA(2760) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5 MS NIDHI VYAS, AGP (99) for the Respondent(s) No. 1

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI

¶12

Date : 24/03/2021

¶13

ORAL ORDER

¶14

Heard Mr. M. B. Rana, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms. Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP for the respondent no.1-State.

¶15

The grievance of the petitioner is that the land which is used as 'smashan' by the villagers has been encroached upon by particular community and some construction is put up on said land. The petitioner has made various representations but the authority concerned has not taken any decision or not given any hearing to the petitioner in respect of the representations made by the petitioner and, hence, by way of present petition, the petitioner has prayed for following relief:

¶16

“9A. Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow the present petition.

¶17

Page 1 of 4

¶18

C/SCA/5308/2021 ORDER

¶19

9B. Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, more particularly, Collector, Banaskantha, to immediately take appropriate action by deciding the application of the petitioner dated 11.01.2021 at Annexure-A, in the interest of justice.

¶20

9C. Your Lordship may be pleased to direct the respondent the District Development Officer, Banaskantha to initiate appropriate proceedings and direct the Talati cum Mantri, Kodram Gram-Panchayat to allot the land in question being Survey no.61 as Burial Ground (Smashan) to Devi Pujak Community by considering that, the said community is using the said land for final rituals since time immemorial, the interest of justice

¶21

9D. During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to allow the Devi Pujak Community to use the land in question for final rituals, in the interest of justice.

¶22

9E. Your Lordships may be pleased to pass any such and other relief/s as may be deemed just and proper in the interest of justice;”

¶23

Mr. M. B. Rana,learned advocate, at the outset, submits that if this Court is considering the prayer-9(B), in that case, at this stage, he would not press prayer-9(C).

¶24

Ms. Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP submits that considering

¶25

Page 2 of 4

¶26

C/SCA/5308/2021 ORDER

¶27

the fact that the representations made by the petitioner are pending, interest of justice would be served if appropriate authority is directed to consider and decide the representations that are made by the petitioner. It is also submitted by learned AGP that if the directions are issued to hear all the interested parties, in that case, no interested parties will have any grievance that while deciding the representations made by the petitioners, particular interested party is not heard. Ms. Nidhi Vyas, learned AGP also submitted that the Collector, Banaskantha may be directed to decide the application by issuing notice to all the affected parties.

¶28

Considering the aforesaid submissions made by learned advocates appearing for both the sides, present petition is disposed of with following directions:

¶29

(1) The petitioner has already made representations which are produced at page-14 of the petition which indicates that the petitioner has made representation on 11/01/2021, however, if the petitioner wants to add anything or place anything before the concerned authority outside the representation, the petitioner shall carry out the said exercise within a period of two weeks from today. Once the petitioner carries out said exercise, respondent no.3, Collector, Banaskantha shall issue notice to the petitioner and give opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner. Respondent no.3, Collector, Banaskantha is directed to issue notice to the alleged encroachers or any other party i.e. required to be heard before passing any order. For filing of reply or

¶30

Page 3 of 4

¶31

C/SCA/5308/2021 ORDER

¶32

for hearing, respondent no.3, Collector, Banaskantha shall give fifteen days time to all the interested parties and notice be sent to each of the interested parties by way of RPAD. From the issuance of notice, respondent no.3 the Collector, Banaskantha is directed to hear all the interested parties and take decision in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of issuance of notice by passing reasoned order strictly in accordance with law.

¶33

It is made clear that rights and contentions of all the interested parties are kept open while issuing aforesaid directions as this Court has not gone into the merits of the matter. Any order that respondent no.3, Collector, Banaskantha may pass shall be subject to rights and contentions of the parties in view of the directions issued by this Court.

¶34

7. Direct service is permitted.

¶35

(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J)

¶36

ila

¶37

Page 4 of 4

Mafatlal Jesangbhai Vaghela v. State of Gujarat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mafatlal Jesangbhai Vaghela 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

Jyotsnaben Ratilal Kikani Vs State of Gujarat

Lavjibhai Khetabhai Thakore Vs Development Commissioner Gujarat State

Ayesha Rusi Modi D/O Late Ruti Rusi Modi Wd/O Late Rusi Modi S/O Shreyaji Modi Vs State of Gujarat

Chetan Ramanlal Shah Vs State of Gujarat

Daxaben Miteshkumar Nathani, Member (Councillor), Devgadhbariya Nagarpalika Vs Secretary, Urban Development and Urban Housing Department

Subhash Yashvantsinh Ahluwaliya Vs State of Gujarat