Point of law: Giving false evidence by filing false affidavit is an evil which must be effectively curbed with a strong hand. Prosecution should be ordered when it is considered expedient in the interest of justice to punish the delinquent, but there must be a prima facie case of deliberate falsehood on a matter of substance and the court should be satisfied that there is a reasonable foundation for the charge.

JUDGMENT :

ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J.

1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

A. Be pleased to issue the writ of mandamus, writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction restraining the respondents, specially the respondent no 2 from taking any coercive and arbitrary action against the building site of the present petitioner situated in city survey nos. 2679, 2680, 2681 and 2722/A/3 in Raikhad Ward of the Ahmedabad city, without following the procedure prescribed under Chapter 15 of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act 1949 and principles of natural justice.

B. Pending hearing and final disposal of the present petition the respondent no 2 may be directed not to take any coercive steps against the property of the petitioner situated in city survey. nos. 2679, 2680,2681 and 2722/A/3 in Raikhad Ward of the Ahmedabad city.

C. Any other and further relief in the interest of justice may kindly be granted.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is carrying out his business by developing and renovating the building schemes and had purchased constructed building, which was known as ‘BATAKA’ Building in Raikhad Ward of City of Ahmedabad. It is the case of the petitioner that in the year 1937, pieces of land bearing Survey Nos.2679, 2680, 2681 and 2722/A/3 totaling the area about 113.71 Sq. Mtrs. was purchased by Baghbaan-yar Noor Mohammad by different sale deeds, bearing sale deed Nos.5535 and 5536 of dated 14.9.36, whereas sale deed No.275 is of dated 4.3.37, and in the year 1937, he constructed a double storied building with basement and named it as ‘BATAKA’ Building. The petitioner has put forth his case by further asserting that the Municipal Tax bill issued by the respondent No.2 authority reflects the age of the building as 80 years and was also provided with electricity supply by the electricity company. Original owner Yar Mohammad Noor Mohammad died on 8.5.1945 and wife Janbibi also died on 25.12.1973. The heirs sold the premises to one Fatima I. Pipdawala and Ajema Jave Pipdawala by registered sale deed No.3664 on 16.8.17.

3. The petitioner purchased the above-said property on as it is basis by registered sale deed No.3001 on 7.11.20 from Pipdawala family and also taken required permission under the provisions of the Disturbed Area Act and the sale deed got registered in favour of the petitioner. Since the building was of old structure, with a view to put up new structure, the petitioner planned out and submitted an intention by filing online form on 5.3.21. Online application ID No.1677809. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner did not receive any reply from the respondent No.2. He started demolition work with a view to put up new construction, but all of a sudden, after about three months, the petitioner received a communication dated 21.5.2021 from the Maintenance Surveyor, Raikhad, Ward No.1, informing the petitioner that his application came to be rejected and the above-said rejection, which was communicated, was limited to one survey number and not to whole parcel of land.

4. The petitioner carried out his work under deemed permission contemplated under the law as the total area of plot is only 113.71 Sq. Mtrs. According to the petitioner, he received one letter, considered to be an order issued under the provisions of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act (GPMC Act) informing the petitioner not to carry out the work and the seal is stated to have been applied. On 28.5.2021, the petitioner replied to the said communication intimating that he is a bonafide purchaser and necessary work is carried out by keeping in mind the provisions of the GPMC Act and the construction is on the existing old structure and never in past, any objection was received and according t