Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 5314
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23063 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2020 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23063 of 2019 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR VACATING INTERIM RELIEF) NO. 2 of 2020 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 23063 of 2019 ==========================================================
TALSHIBHAI JIVABHAI CHAVDA (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL HEIR Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ==========================================================
Appearance:
DECEASED LITIGANT(100) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE(3267) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3 MR RAHUL K DAVE(3978) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1.1,1.2,1.3 DS AFF.NOT FILED (N)(11) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3 MR AMAR D MITHANI(484) for the Respondent(s) No. 5 MR ASPI M KAPADIA(1865) for the Respondent(s) No. 7 MR Y J PATEL(3985) for the Respondent(s) No. 4 MS DELSHAD A KAPADIA(10238) for the Respondent(s) No. 7 MS MINOO A SHAH(774) for the Respondent(s) No. 6 NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV Date : 16/12/2021
['DECEASED LITIGANT', 'KIRTIDEV R DAVE', 'NOTICE SERVED BY DS', 'DS AFF NOT FILED N', 'Y J PATEL', 'AMAR D MITHANI', 'MINOO A SHAH', 'ASPI M KAPADIA']
ORAL ORDER
1. Though served none appears for respondent no. 3.
2. Heard learned advocates for the respective parties. Pending the petition, the original petitioner has died on 03.12.2021 and by virtue of a Civil Application filed, the heirs are on record.
3. In this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the prayer is to issue a direction to respondents no. 1 to 4 i.e. the State, the Collector and the local authorities to remove the illegal and unauthorised construction in the form of CNG pump by the respondents no. 5 to 7.
4. The memo of the petition indicates that the petitioner is “a peace loving citizen of India. The right of life and liberty is Fundamental Right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.” The emphasis of the petitioner appears to be that on setting up of a CNG station, the respondent no. 5 would endanger the life and liberty of residents of Surendranagar. A concern is voiced in the petition that the canopy of supply of CNG is on the road and will lead to accidents and cause injury to some persons and therefore distribution of CNG at the petrol pump endangers the life of the people around.
5. Mr. Rahul Dave, learned advocate for the petitioners would invite the attention of the court to the communications dated 25.09.2019 and 27.09.2019 in support of his submission that the CNG pump is being set up on a road which is to be widened to 60 mtrs and evidently there is no permission from the local authorities namely the Surendranagar – Dudhrej Nagar Seva Sadan. Annexed to the petition are communications by one Chamanlal N. Chavda, apparently a member of the Surendranagar – Dudhrej Nagarpalika addressed to the Collector voicing concern over the setting up of CNG pump at Surendranagar by the respondent no. 5.
5.1 Mr. Dave today has filed written submissions reiterating what has been stated in the petition. He would submit that the road on which the CNG station is to be set up, within the precincts of the petrol pump run by the respondent no. 5, would lead to vehicular accidents. It is his submission that there are definite rules for erection of CNG petrol pump and the project is being undertaken without following the statutory norms. No permissions from the competent authorities have been sought for and even if it is the case of the respondents that the District Magistrate has granted them permission, the permission itself states that it is subject to permissions from various other authorities.
5.2 Essentially, therefore the emphasis of the petitioners is that the entire project of setting up a CNG station at the petrol pump which is an outlet of a dealership under the Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL) where the Gujarat Gas by virtue of an agreement entered into with BPCL is setting up a CNG pump, is in violation of all permissions of statutory norms.
6. Mr. Amar Mithani, learned advocate appearing for respondent no. 5 would rely on the affidavit-in-reply filed by one Rajesh Vora. Reading the affidavit, serious apprehensions have been drawn on the bonafides of the petitioners. It is the submission of Mr. Mithani that the original petitioner had entered into this litigation with an oblique motive. The city of Surendranagar has a population of about 3 lakhs and there is only one CNG dispensing station named as ‘Nilkanth Gas Station’. There are about 7000 CNG run vehicles in Surendranagar and there is only one CNG station namely ‘Nilkanth Gas Station’. Para 7 of the affidavit is read out by Mr. Mithani to indicate that the petitioner is the first cousin of the Manager/Partner of ‘Nilkanth Gas Station’ and the petition therefore is filed at the behest of the gas station.
6.1 Details of the land area have been mentioned in the affidavit-in- reply and Mr. Mithani has submitted that the fuel station has been in operation since 06.04.1962. It is a franchisee of BPCL. Respondent no. 5 holds huge area of land of City Survey Nos. 95 and 96 at Surendranagar and the remaining free parcel of land is being
