SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Guj) 764

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
A.J. SHASTRI, J.
Chauhan Jasuba Mohabatsing - Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 12727 of 2016
Decided On : 25-07-2018

Advocates Appeared:
Abhimanyu Rathod, Adv., Mehul H Rathod, Adv., H.S. Munshaw, Adv., Soaham Joshi, Adv.

Headnote:

Constitution of India - Article 226 - Compensation - Case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the resident of village and their permanent resident of village since number of years - On account of devastated floods which took place, the households of the petitioners have been washed away severely affected and some of the persons houses were also irreversibly damaged - Held, Further fact which is reflecting clearly emerging is that while denying the benefit, the communication which has been issued by the authority is not supported by any reasons - On the contrary, the orders said to be laconic and too general in nature which reflects a clear non-application of mind and as such keeping in view of the object of the Government Resolution and in view of the fact of damage to the petitioners property and households undisputedly visible on record, the authority deserves to be directed to reconsider the case of the petitioners in view of the aforesaid peculiarity of the situation - Petition disposed of. (Para 14)

JUDGMENT & ORDER :

A.J. SHASTRI, J.

1. The present petitioners are the resident of village Nalodar, Taluka Vav, District- Banaskantha have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the purpose of seeking following reliefs:-

"9.(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.1 to cause inquiry into the matter and to initiate disciplinary action against the responsible officers who is found guilty of inaction in implementing the government policy;

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to forthwith disburse the amount of compensation to the petitioners as determined by the Taluka Development Officer, Vav with all consequential benefit in favour of the petitioners;

(C) Pending the admission, hearing and disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondents-authorities to make payment of compensation as determined to the petitioners forthwith and further be pleased to direct the respondent no.1 to submit action taken report of its inquiry for passing further appropriate interim orders, in the interest of justice and equity;

(D) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as may be deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of present case."

2. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioners are the resident of village Nalodar, Taluka Vav, District-Banaskantha and their permanent resident of village since number of years. On account of devastated floods which took place in July 2015, the households of the petitioners have been washed away severely affected and some of the persons houses were also irreversibly damaged.

3. It is the case of the petitioners that on account of such floods affected area the State Government by way of passing Government Resolution on 27.04.2015 has resolved to pay compensation of amount of Rs. 11,200/-, Rs. 9,200 and Rs. 7,200/- for partially damaged Kachcha/Pakka houses respectively. It was decided by the Government to extend such benefits to the resident of village Nalodar who are the victim of natural calamity of floods of 2015. With a view to ascertain the damage, the survey was carried out, a detail inquiry was conducted and list of eligible persons have been prepared and respondent No.4 upon such was pleased to pass four separate orders in the months of August and September, 2015 for awarding compensation to the petitioners under the policy of aforesaid Government Resolution.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that on the basis of aforesaid orders, the respondent No.4 also prepared contingent bills for release of fund to the petitioners by way of compensation. However, in spite of aforesaid office orders having been passed by the Taluka Development Officer after due inquiry, the payments have not been made to the petitioners for some unknown reasons to the petitioners. As a result of this, on number of occasions, the petitioners were constrained to approach the office of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 with a request to release the amount of compensation. However, lame excuses were given and hope was continued but fact remain that the payment has not been paid.

5. It is further the case of the petitioners that the detail representations were also found by the badly affected persons of Taluka Vav on 10.02.2016 and 18.04.2016 but so far no payment was made. Even after such kind of repeated request and written representations, the amount of compensation is not disbursed. However, respondent No.4 had addressed a communication on 22.03.2016 to the Deputy District Development Officer (Revenue Branch) informing that even after March, 2016 so far no compensation is paid. As a result of this, left with no other remedy, the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court by way of

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top