Sukeshi Vijaybhai Bhatt VS State of Gujarat

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

BHARGAV D.KARIA
Sukeshi Vijaybhai Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3:Mr. A.B. Munshi(1238), Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Gaurang Waghela, Advocate for Chintan K. Gandhi(8600)
For the Respondent No.1: Mr. Ishan Joshi, A.G.P.(1)
For the Respondent No.5:Mr. Chirayu Mehta, Advocate for Mr. Devang Vyas(2794)
For the Respondent No.6:Mr. Rituraj M. Meena(3224), Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.3, 4: Notice Served By D.S.(5)
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Maulin Raval, Sr. Advocate Raval and Trivedi Associates(9262)

JUDGMENT (CAV)

Bhargav D. Karia, J.—Heard learned advocate Mr. A.B. Munshi for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Ishan Joshi for the respondent No.1—State, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Maulin Raval for Raval & Trivedi Associates and learned advocate Mr. Gaurang Waghela for learned advocate Mr. Chintan Gandhi for respondent No.2, learned advocate Mr. Chirayu Mehta for learned advocate Mr. Devang Vyas for respondent No.5, learned advocate Mr. Rituraj Meena for respondent No.6 through video conference.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs :

“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned T.P Scheme being Town Planning Scheme, Ahmedabad-24 (Maninagar Extension ) varied so far as it relates to Final Plot No.64/4 admeasuring 7289 sq.matrs.and be pleased to hold and declare that entry o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

BHARGAV D.KARIASukeshi Vijaybhai Bhatt – AppellantVersusState of Gujarat – Respondent

BHARGAV D.KARIA
Sukeshi Vijaybhai Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent