( 1 ) THE petitioner, a Co-operative Housing Society, registered under the provisions of Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India through its Secretary, praying for quashing and setting aside the orders at Annexures A and F passed by the District Collector, Ahmedabad dated 24. 04. 1997 and 29. 08. 1991 respectively as well as the orders at Annexures G and H passed by the Section Officer, Revenue Department, State of Gujarat on 01. 06. 1995 and 10. 06. 1991 respectively. The petitioner has also prayed for interim relief against the execution, operation and implementation of these orders and further prayed for an injunction restraining the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 from taking possession of the houses belonging to the members of the petitioner Society situated at Survey No. 316 of village Ghatlodiya, Ahmedabad.

( 2 ) THE petition was admitted and rule was issued on 10. 08. 1998. The Court has also granted ad-interim stay of the impugned order dated 24. 04. 1997 passed by the District Collector, Ahmedabad at Annexure A to the petition on condition that the petitioner Society shall, without prejudice to its rights and contentions in the petition, deposit with respondent No. 2 a sum of Rs. 9 Lacs within six months from the date of the order and on condition that the property constructed on the land shall not be transferred and if the amount as aforesaid is not deposited within aforesaid time, ad-interim stay shall stand vacated automatically.

( 3 ) THE petitioner has challenged this order in LPA No. 1110 of 1998 and while disposing the said LPA on 30. 06. 1999, the Division Bench has observed that the appellant Society has not paid the amount and the period of deposit of the amount was over and the ad-interim stay was not operating in favour of the appellant. In view of this circumstance, the Court has not interfered with the impugned order passed by the Learned Single Judge of this Court on 10. 08. 1998. Though the Division Bench has accepted the request of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant ? petitioner for early disposal of the petition and though the petition was peremptorily fixed for final hearing on 12. 07. 1999, the same could not be disposed of till this date.

( 4 ) DURING the pendency of this petition, the petitioner has moved Civil Application No. 6891 of 1999 for amendment by inserting certain paragraphs in the memo of petition. The said amendment was granted by this Court vide order dated 26. 10. 1999 and the petitioner was directed to incorporate the amendment in the main petition within a week from the date of the said order. Despite this order, amendment was not carried out by the petitioner within the time granted by this Court. A request was, therefore, made by the learned advocate appearing for the petitioner when the matter has come up for final hearing on 31. 07. 2006 to permit the petitioner to carry out the said amendment. The Court, therefore, passed an order on 31. 07. 2006 observing therein that since the order is already passed directing the petitioner to carry out the amendment and there is no serious objection from the other side in carrying out such amendment, even now, request was granted and the petitioner was directed to carry out the amendment within one week from the date of the order i. e. 31. 07. 2006. Pursuant to this order, the petitioner has carried out the amendment in the main petition.

( 5 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner society held the land in question and has community of interest and unity of possession as the petitioner society has purchased the said land from the respondent Nos. 4 to 10, the original land owners who have purchased it from one Gandaji Thakor. The members of the petitioner Society have constructed their own houses in the said Society in the year 1980. The sale deed in respect of the land in question was executed in three parts between the petitioner Society and the respo

Click Here to Read the rest of this document