( 1 ) IN these petitions, common questions of fact and law have been raised. It is, therefore, convenient to dispose of all the petitions by a Common Judgment.

( 2 ) FOR appreciating the contentions raised in the present group of petitions, the facts in nutshell of the first matter, i. e. Special Civil Application No. 4663 of 1987 may now be stated.

( 3 ) THE said petition is filed by Chhani Nagar Panchayat (herein after referred to as "panchayat" for short) for an appropriate writ, direction or order,quashing and setting aside Notifications at Annexure-A and B to the petition dated August 21, 1987, and for permanent injunction restraining the State of Gujarat-Respondent No. 1 from exercising power under Section 16 of the Gujarat Industrial Development Act, 1962; and for declaring certain Survey Numbers of Village Chhani as Notified Area under Chapter 26-A of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1963. A further prayer was made, restraining the respondent authorities from declaring the above Survey numbers from deleting as part of Nagar Panchayat under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961.

( 4 ) THE case of the Petitioner Panchayat was that, it was a Panchayat constituted under the provisions of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961. Certain Survey numbers which were within the local limits of Nagar Panchayat were sought to be excluded from the limits of Chhani Nagar Panchayat by issuing a Notification in purported exercise of powers under Section 16 of the Gujarat Industrial Development Act, 1962 read with sub-section (2) of Section 9 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act 1961, as also Chapter-XVI A of the Gujarat Municipalities Act 1963. The notification was to take effect from the date it was published in the Government Gazette.

( 5 ) WHEN the petitions were placed for admission, Rule was issued, but interim relief was refused by observing that grant of interim relief would virtually amount to allowing the petition at the stage of admission. The matters have now been called for final hearing.

( 6 ) WE have heard learned counsel Mr. Tushar Mehta for the petitioner, learned Asst. Govt. Pleader for the State and learned counsel Mr. D. U. Shah for Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation.

( 7 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner raised two principal contentions. Firstly, he submitted that before an action under sub section (2) of Section 9 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act excluding a particular area from a Gram or Nagar Panchayat is taken, Gram or Nagar Panchayat must be consulted. Since Chhani Nagar Panchayat was not consulted before issuance of Notification under Section 9 (2) of the Act, the action was without jurisdiction and liable to be set aside. Secondly, it was urged that the exercise of power under Section 16 of the Gujarat Industrial Development Act, 1962 results in civil consequences. Before such an action can be taken, the authorities were duty bound to observe principles of natural justice. Since before taking action under Section 16 of the Act, neither objections were invited nor opportunity of hearing was afforded to the Panchayat, an action is violative of principles of natural justice and void ab initio.

( 8 ) THE respondents, on the other hand, supported the action taken by the authorities. Regarding action under Section 9, it was submitted that, there was consultation before exercise of power by the Development Commissioner who had exercised the power under Section 9 (2) of the Act on behalf of the State Government and, therefore, it cannot be said that the action was invalid as there was no consultation with Nagar Panchayat by the authorities. It was stated in this connection that even in the Notification itself there is a recital to the effect that the State Government had consulted District Panchayat, Taluka Panchayat as well as Nagar Panchayat. A resolution was also passed by the Nagar Panhayat. It is, therefore, not correct to state that there was no consultation, and hence the action was bad