J.B.PARDIWALA, J.

By this writ-application in the nature of a public interest litigation, the petitioner, a resident of Jamnagar and a Chartered Accountant by profession, has brought to our notice that the respondent No.4, in collusion with the respondent No.3, has constructed 26 shops on the common plot of the respondent No.3 Society, without any permission from the Jamnagar Urban Development Authority as well as the Jamnagar Municipal Corporation.

In such circumstances referred to above, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

(a). Admit and allow this petition.

(b). Issue a Writ of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate wit, order or direction, to the respondents no. 1 and 2 to act in accordance with the law and as per law declared by the Honourable Supreme Court Annexure “B” to this petition.

(c). Pending the admission and final hearing of the present petition be pleased to direct the respondents no. 1 and 2 to produce on record of the case development/construction permission granted in favour of Respondents No. 3 and 4.

(d). Pending the admission and final hearing of the present petition be pleased to restrain respondents no. 3 and 4 from making any construction on common plot of the Society except in accordance with law and be further pleased to direct the respondents to maintain status quo in relation to subject land and property. "

2. The case made out by the petitioner in this petition may be summarized as under:-

2.1 According to the petitioner, the respondent is a Cooperative Housing Society, registered under the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act. The respondent No.4 is a builder and developer of the land.

2.2 The respondent No.3 Society entered into a development agreement with the respondent No.4 for construction of around 26 shops on the common plot of the Society, which is even otherwise not permissible in law.

2.3 According to the petitioner, after execution of such agreement dated 28th September, 2011 referred to above, the respondent No.4, without getting any plans sanctioned from the competent authority or without seeking any appropriate permission in that regard, proceeded ahead to construct 26 shops on the common plot of the respondent No.3 Society.

2.4 It is also the case of the petitioner that the officers of the Jamnagar Urban Development Authority and the officers of the Jamnagar Municipal Corporation connived with the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and failed to take appropriate action in that regard at appropriate time. According to the petitioner, if the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 would have restrained the respondent No.4 in the first instance, then in such circumstances, the respondent No.4 could not have proceeded to construct 26 shops on the common plot of the respondent No.3 Society.

2.5 According to the petitioner, no common plot which is earmarked at the time of granting N.A permission can be converted for any use other than for the purpose earmarked. Even the General Development Control Regulations framed by the authority prohibits construction on a common plot.

2.6 According to the petitioner, a common plot in any residential society is meant for common use and common purposes of all the members of the society, and the society, in no circumstances could have entered into such an agreement with the respondent No.4 for construction of shops.

3. This Court, vide order dated 23rd January, 2014, directed the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to file affidavit indicating whether the area in dispute is the common plot of the society in question, and secondly, whether any permission had been granted by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 for making the construction on the said common plot.

4. Pursuant to our order referred to above, the respective respondents have filed their affidavits.

5. Stance of the respondent No.1, Jamnagar Area Development Authority:

5.1 On behalf of the respondent No.1, an affidavit has been affirmed duly sworn by the Chief Executive, inter-alia stating as under:-

"4. I say that after