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

2021 Supreme(Guj) 853

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J.
Dharmeshkumar Champakbhai Patel – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 12870 of 2020 With R/Special Civil Application No. 2332 of 2021
Decided on : 08-09-2021

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : MS. KRUTI M SHAH
For the Respondent: MR ADITYASINH J JADEJA, MR ASHISH M DAGLI

Point of Law - It is the settled position of law that the principles of natural justice is applicable in every exercise of powers either administrative quasi judicial or judicial and further such exercise must be with the support of the cogent reasons since the reasons are also part and parcel of the compliance of natural justice and further the affected persons are always to be informed as to why such action is being initiated after affording appropriate opportunity.

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226 and clause (g) of Article 243 - Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 - Section 105, 270 - Gujarat Panchayats (Procedure) Rules, 1997 - Rule 55 - Obstruction and encroachment upon public streets and open sites - Principles of natural justice - Whether such site is vested in panchayat or not - Whether or not such obstruction, encroachment, or projection has been made before or after village is specified as such under clause (g) of Article 243 of Constitution or before or after property is vested in panchayat.

Findings of the Court - It is settled position of law that principles of natural justice is applicable in every exercise of powers either administrative quasi judicial or judicial and further such exercise must be with support of cogent reasons since reasons are also part and parcel of compliance of natural justice and affected persons are always to be informed as to why such action is being initiated after affording appropriate opportunity and that having not been done on case on hand, Court is inclined to accept contention raised by advocate for petitioners in lead matter and as such another cognate petition is basically for taking action against unauthorized construction, both these petitions deserves to be disposed of on following line, which would meet ends of justice and this disposal of petition on line on which Court has suggested there is a concurrence on behalf of advocates appearing for respective parties in both petitions - Petitioners are directed to respond to notice which may be issued for grant of opportunity of hearing to them and after such grant of opportunity, concerned respondent authority is directed to take appropriate decision in accordance with law by assigning appropriate reasons - Court has not expressed any opinion on merit with regard to any of issues raised in petition, since action is set aside only on account of violation of principles of natural justice.

Result - Petitions stand disposed of

ORDER :

1. Both these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been filed almost on similar issue and as such, upon request of learned advocates appearing in both these matters, hearing was opened up conjointly and as such, the petitions are being disposed of by present common order by treating Special Civil Application No. 12870 of 2020 as a lead matter and for the sake of convenience, the facts are taken from lead matter.

2. Special Civil Application No. 12870 of 2020 is filed by two petitioners challenging issuance of notice dated 21.09.2020 issued by the respondent - Gram Panchayat Buhari, and as a consequence thereof, a request is made to maintain status-quo. The premise on which the petitioners have approached this Court is that petitioner no. 1 is selling ‘Vegetables’ sitting in Bazar Faliya at the place in question since about 40-50 years, whereas petitioner no. 2 is selling ‘Pan masala’ from the lorry (Lari) in the same area, which is also situated in Bazar Faliya. The whole market is running from this area and there are many more persons who are carrying their livelihood by running small business since years together. The petitioners are also paying charges for sitting and selling the articles to the Gram Panchayat, Buhari. However, petitioner no. 1 received notice from the respondent - Gram Panchayat by indicating to vacate the unauthorized encroachment within a period of seven days and this notice impugned in the petition dated 21.09.2020 appears to be on the basis of one complaint filed by Mrs. Premilaben Narendrakumar Shah, resident of Village Buhari. As these businesses are going on in front of her house since long and on account this placement of lorry (Lari) carrying on business, anti social elements are creating problems and on the basis of this impugned notice, petitioner no. 1 was sought to be removed, whereas petitioner no. 2 on the similar line was to be dealt with, but at the relevant point of time, could not receive the notice, and upon apprehension has immediately approached this Court along with petitioner no. 1 as the very said action was sought to be initiated. In the aforesaid petition, notice was issued by an order dated 23.10.2020, which reads as under :-

“Issue notice returnable on 29.10.2020.

Learned advocate appearing for the petitioners relies upon the decision of this Court dated 27.07.2015 in Special Civil Application No. 9026 of 2014, wherein after considering the Rule 55 of the Gujarat Panchayats (Procedure) Rules, 1997, this Court has considered to grant opportunity of personal hearing even where notice is issued under Section 105 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act. The petitioners are permitted to be served by speed post at the cost of the petitioners and also by E-mail.”

3. So far as petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 2332 of 2021 is concerned, this petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by Mrs. Premilaben Narendrakumar Shah who objected to the sitting of the petitioners along with other persons and has submitted that though orders have been passed on 01.10.2020, 14.10.2020 and 20.10.2020, by respondent no. 3 - District Development Officer, but the same under one pretext or the other have not been implemented and, therefore, for enforcement of such orders, prayers have been made in the petition, which ultimately results into removal of the petitioners of the lead matter along with other persons. The said petition came up for consideration before the Court on 08.02.2021 and looking to the similarity of facts and the ultimate outcome which may take place, the Court was pleased to issue notice and ordered to place this matter along with the aforesaid lead matter and with the aforesaid background, both these petitions today have come up for consideration before this Court, in which learned advocates appearing in the respective petitions of both the sides have requested the Court to take up the matter conjointly and accordingly the hearing has ta

        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
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top