Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ, D.N.RAY, J
ASHOKBHAI GOVINDBHAI PATEL & ORS. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioners failed to arrange legal representation. (Para 1) |
| 2. challenge to statutory provisions concerning slum redevelopment. (Para 2) |
| 3. court dismissed the petition for lack of interest. (Para 3) |
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. There is an office report dated 17.01.2024 wherein it is indicated that after withdrawal of appearance by Mr.S.K.Patel, learned advocate on behalf of the petitioners, no one has put in appearance. The petitioners though have withdrawn the powers given to Mr.S.K.Patel, learned advocate appearing on their behalf but no further arrangement has been made. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioners for a long time. Once the petitioners have withdrawn the Vakalatnama, they were required to make an alternative arrangement.
2. The prayers made in the writ petition are as under :
“(A)Admit this petition;
(B) Be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction, and thereby, be pleased to hold that the provisions 2(n), 2k(ii), 2k(iv), 9 and 10 of “ The Gujarat Regularization of Unauthorized Development Act, 2011 and rule 5, 6 and 9 of the “ The Gujarat Regularization of Unauthorized Development
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
