Allowed

Shiv Shankar Goyal v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC21 May 2024CW/3136/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that cancelling construction permission without a prior opportunity of hearing violates natural justice. The impugned cancellation order was quashed and set aside, with liberty granted to the authorities to take appropriate action after giving the petitioner a chance to be heard.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 13.12.2023 cancelling the construction permission is quashed and set aside. Respondents are at liberty to take action after giving an opportunity of hearing.

Shiv Shankar Goyal Vs State of Rajasthan — Landlord and Tenant | Rajasthan HC (2024)

¶1

[2024:RJ-JD:22920]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3136/2024

¶4

Shiv Shankar Goyal S/o Late Hazari Lal Goyal, Aged About 63 Years, By Caste Aggarwal, R/o Plot No. 1193/5, Ward No. 15, Mini Mayapuri, Sriganganagar, Rajasthan.

¶5

----Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through The Principal Secretary, Local Self Government Department, Government Of Rajasthan, Jaipur (Raj.).

¶8

The Chairman, Nagar Parishad, Sir Ganganagar (Raj.).

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr.Jayant Garg. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rajesh Parihar.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

21/05/2024

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶15

The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 13.12.2023 whereby the respondents have revoked the order dated 01.12.2023 granting construction permission to the petitioner.

¶16

Briefly the facts noted in the present writ petition are that the petitioner was granted construction permission over the piece of land falling in the area of Municipal Council, Sri Ganganagar. The construction permission granted to the petitioner vide order dated 01.12.2023. While, the petitioner was undertaking the construction in pursuance of the permission granted to him, the respondents issued an order dated 13.12.2023 whereby the

[2024:RJ-JD:22920]

[CW-3136/2024]

(2 of 3)

construction permission granted to the petitioner vide order dated 01.12.2023 was canceled. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was granted construction permission vide order dated 01.12.2023 after following due process of law. The petitioner has made compliance of all the requisite provisions and submitted all the requisite documents before the respondents, only thereafter, the construction permission was granted to him vide order dated 01.12.2023, however, without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the construction permission granted to him has been unilaterally revoked vide order dated 13.12.2023. He, therefore, prays that the order dated 13.12.2023 may be quashed and set aside.

¶22

Learned counsel for the respondents is not in a position to refute the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the order dated 13.12.2023 has been passed in public interest though no opportunity of hearing has been afforded to the petitioner while passing the order impugned.

¶23

I have considered the submissions made at the bar and gone through the relevant record of the case including the order dated 13.12.2023.

¶24

Since, the order dated 13.12.2023 has been passed without giving any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, therefore, the same is in gross violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner undertook construction activities on the subject piece of land in pursuance of the construction permission granted to him vide order dated 01.12.2023, therefore, unless a show cause

[2024:RJ-JD:22920]

[CW-3136/2024]

(3 of 3)

notice is issued to the petitioner or an opportunity of hearing is granted, the order revoking or canceling the construction permission granted on 01.12.2023 cannot be unilaterally passed by the respondents.

¶29

In view of the discussion made above, the present writ petition is allowed. The order dated 13.12.2023 (Annex.1) is quashed and set aside. However, the respondents will be at liberty to take appropriate action against the petitioner, if deemed necessary in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶30

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶31

170-Anil Singh/-

Shiv Shankar Goyal v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Shankar Goyal v. State of Rajasthan

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

Narayan Lal Sagar Vs Raj. Bhoodan Yagna Board and Ors.

Devikot Gaushala Vs State of Rajasthan

Om Prakash Arora Vs State of Rajasthan

Umesh Vs State of Rajasthan

Kailashibai Vs State of Rajasthan

Mohani Devi Vs State of Rajasthan