ORDER :

1. By way of these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the communication by which the Corporation pursuant to the hearings inter se between the parties to the petition has observed that further action on the revised plans submitted by the respondent No.6 shall be taken, in accordance with the General Development Control Regulations, 2017 (for short, hereinafter referred to as `the GDCR, 2017’) by the Building Scrutiny Pool.

2. The lead matter for the purposes of this decision is Special Civil Application No.9408 of 2021. Prayers made in SCA No.9408 of 2021 read as under:

“9(B) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 25.5.2021 passed by the respondent No.3 (Annexure – A)

9(C) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to demolish any illegal construction including the structure for `Electrical Sub- Station’ built up on 3 level underground (Cellar) parking ramp forthwith and further be pleased direct the respondent authorities to not to permit the respondent developer to carry out construction and installation of `Electrical Sub-Station’ adjacent to residences of the petitioner in future.”

3. The facts in brief are as under:

3.1. The petitioner is a resident of Someshwar Bungalows adjacent to the commercial complex named “Iconic Shyamal”.

3.2. It is the case of the petitioner that the construction activities are being carried out without following the procedure of the provisions of the comprehensive General Development Control Regulations, 2017, Gujarat Fire Prevention and Life Safety Measures Act, 2013 and the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949.

3.3. It is the case of the petitioner that necessary margins are not left by the respondent No.6 – Developer and the existing structure does not comply with the building level. The case of the petitioner is that the developer is carrying out construction of ground floor + 2 floors of “Electrical Sub Station” on the 3 level underground ramp and the front side of the sub-station has been kept towards the residence of the petitioner. The substation with high voltage / tension electric power constructed 10-12 feet away from Bungalow is a huge health hazard due to generation of magnetic radiation known to be adverse to health.

3.4. The electric sub-station cannot be permitted on a hollow ramp with space underneath which in case it collapses would be a great risk causing a fire. The construction is without the approved plans. Even the Torrent Power Limited had preferred a road facing location, however, being hand in glove with the officials of the Corporation, permissions are granted. The oil based sub-station would involve a dug pit which would hold 8000 liters of engine oil and same is a serious threat to life.

3.5. In an earlier round of litigation in SCA No.4421 of 2001, the Court specifically directed hearing of parties and though extensive written arguments were filed, the impugned order is without assigning any reasons. In this context, the prayer is made to set aside the order as the same has been passed without assigning any reasons.

4. In Special Civil Application No.9408 of 2021, Mr. A.D. Oza, learned advocate assisted by Mr. Meet Shah, learned advocate has argued for the petitioner. In Special Civil Application No.9848 of 2021, Mr. P.A. Mehd, learned advocate has argued for the petitioners. Both the learned advocates have filed a synopsis of Written Arguments.

5. Mr. K.M. Antani, learned advocate has appeared for respondent Nos.1 to 4 for the State-respondents and Mr. Satyam Chhaya, learned advocate has appeared for the respondent – Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, Mr. Salil M. Thakore, learned advocate has appeared for respondent No.5 – Torrent Power Limited while Mr. Dhaval Dave, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Dhruv Tolia, learned advocate has argued for respondent No.6 – Shafalya Infralink L.L.P. Written arguments have also been submit