Court dismissed the petition for lack of prosecution, affirming no interim relief is applicable.

(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 The petitioners though have withdrawn the powers given to Mr.S.K.Patel, learned advocate appearing on their behalf but no further arrangement has been made.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 Once the petitioners have withdrawn the Vakalatnama, they were required to make an alternative arrangement.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 Rules, 2012 as stated in the memo of the petition are illegal and ultra-

virus.

(C) Be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to declare that provisions of Regulation 9.3 and 9.4 of Regulation for the Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of the Slums, 2010 are arbitrary, ultra-virus, against equity of law and public morality;

(D) Pending admission and till final disposal of this petition direct the respondent state and Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to implement the Scheme “The Regulation for the Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of the Slums- 2010”, by not insisting the compliance of the Regulation 9.3 and 9.4 of the Scheme.

(E) Pending admission and till final disposal of the present petition direct the respondent No.2 to give clear West-North corner portion of about 6000 sq.mtr. To construct sample house under the scheme to accommodate the genuine hutments in 1^st phase as per the scheme, with a direction to grant necessary permission in this regard.

(F) That in the alternative directs the Respondent to hand over the clear and vacant possession of Final Plot No.82 of Village Ghatlodiya/Chandlodia (Survey no.174/1 and

174/2).”

Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 03.08.2011 (Annexure-P9 to this petition).

(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus or nay other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents to give employment to the petitioner on compassionate grounds.

(D) Pending admission and final hearing your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioners for appointment on compassionate grounds.”

3. Looking to the prayers made in the writ petition, it is evident that the challenge is to the vires of statutory provisions. There is no interim relief in favour of the petitioners. It, thus, seems to us that the petitioners have lost interest in the matter. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed for want of prosecution. Interim order, if any, stands discharged.