Disposed

Smt Chhotiya Devi Lodha andORS v. State Urban Developmentors

Rajasthan HC22 May 2015CW/4001/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court disposed of nine writ petitions challenging cancellation of land use change permissions. Court directed Relaxation Committee to examine cases after giving hearing opportunity and submit report within two months for Empowered Committee's final decision.

What did the court decide?

Relaxation Committee directed to examine cases, afford hearing, and submit report within two months for Empowered Committee's final decision; coercive steps stayed.

Smt Chhotiya Devi Lodha andORS Vs State Urban… — Land Acquisition | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5704/2015 & 8 other petitions

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶4

(1)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5704/2015 Shashikala Dangi & Anr.-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents with (2)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4001/2015 Smt. Chhotiya Devi Lodha & Ors.-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents with (3)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4942/2015 Shri Jasdeep Punjabi & Ors.-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents with (4)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5705/2015 Subhash Chand Ostwal-Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents with

¶5

(5)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6132/2015 Kusum Jain & Anr.-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents with (6)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6354/2015 Dushyant Arora & Anr.-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents with (7)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6397/2015 Smt. Chandra Kathat -Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents & (8)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6414/2015 Mukesh Agarwal & Ors.-Petitioners Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents & (9)S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6473/2015 Jitendra Harwani-Petitioner Versus State of Rajasthan & Ors.-Respondents

¶6

Date of Order :: 22/05/2015

¶7

Hon 'ble Ms. J ust ic e Bela M. Trivedi

¶8

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5704/2015 & 8 other petitions

¶9

¶10

Mr. Sudesh Bansal, Mr. Pankaj Sharma for Mr. Deepak Asopa. Mr. Saurabh Bhandari, for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. Manu Bhargava, for the respondent/s.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

BY THE COURT :

¶14

In all these petitions, the petitioners have challenged the action of the respondents in cancelling their respective permissions for change of land use in relation to their respective plots.

¶15

After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, and taking into consideration the documents on record, it appears that the Empowered Committee of the respondents had granted the permissions for change of land use without referring the respective matters to the Relaxation Committee constituted as per Circular dated 30/1/2012 (Annex.R/1). The respondents having received the complaints had reviewed such permissions granted to the petitioners and others similarly situated, and found that the said permissions were granted by the Empowered Committee without placing the matters before the Relaxation Committee, which was constituted under the Circular dated 30/1/2012. The said fact is not disputed by the learned counsels for the petitioners, and they have no objection if the fresh decision is taken by the Empowered Committee after placing the matters before the Relaxation Committee, however they submit that the petitioners be given opportunity of hearing by the Relaxation Committee before taking any decision. The learned Govt. Counsel Mr. Manu Bharagav has also no objection to the said submissions made by the learned counsels for the petitioners.

¶16

In view of the above, it is directed that the Relaxation Committee constituted as per the Circular dated 30/1/2012 shall examine the cases of each of the petitioners, and after giving them reasonable opportunity of

¶17

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.5704/2015 & 8 other petitions

¶18

¶19

hearing, place its report/decision before the Empowered Committee within two month from the date of receipt of this order, on which the Empowered Committee shall take decision within two weeks thereafter and place the matter before the respondents for appropriate decisions.

¶20

It is clarified that the Court has not examined the merits of the petitions, and therefore does not express any opinion on the issues involved. The petitioners shall be at liberty to approach the Court, if any adverse decision is taken by the respondents against the petitioners. Till the decision is taken by the respondents as directed, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the impugned orders cancelling the land use permission of the petitioners.

¶21

With the aforestated directions, the petitions stand disposed of. By this order, the stay applications and other pending applications, if any also stand disposed of. A copy of this order be placed in each connected petitions.

¶22

(Bela M. Trivedi) J .

¶23

Sanjay Solanki PA

¶24

“ All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.” Sanjay Solanki Personal Assistant

Smt Chhotiya Devi Lodha andORS v. State Urban Developmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Chhotiya Devi Lodha andORS v. State Urban Developmentors

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

M/S Chokhi Dhani Developers Pv Vs State of Raj and Ors.

Smt Premlata Gangwal andORS Vs Nathmal andORS

Ratan Chand Sogani andORS Vs Shyam Sunder andORS

M/S Godara Construction Company Vs State of Raj and Another

M/S Hamirmal Sukharaj andANR Vs Shri Nihalchand andANR

Shri Jasdeep Punjabi andORS Vs State Urban Developmentors