##PAGE1##

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/WPPIL/135/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026

0.5421563908914395

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 135 of 2017

With CIVIL APPLICATION (FIXING DATE OF EARLY HEARING)

NO. 1 of 2026 In R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 135 of 2017

=============================================

KANTIBHAI HIRJIBHAI PATEL & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

=============================================

Appearance:

MR HIMANSU M PADHYA(1611) for the Applicant(s) No.

1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MR MAUNIL YAGNIK, ADVOCATE with

MR JJ YAJNIK(1008) for the Applicant(s) No.

1,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 MS DHARITRI PANCHOLI, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2,3

MR RAMNANDAN SINGH(1126) for the Opponent(s) No. 4 MR RAHUL PATEL, ADVOCATE with

MS ARCHANA U AMIN(2462) for the Opponent(s) No. 6 NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 5

=============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY

Date : 27/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. The present petition filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation is pending since the year 2017. In the Civil Application No. 1 of 2026 seeking fixation of date, it is stated that during the pendency of present petition, the construction of the bridge has been completed by the respondent

Page 1 of 3 Uploaded by SHRIJIT PILLAI(HC01400) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 07:29:34 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/WPPIL/135/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026

0.5421563908914395

authorities. In the writ petition, the relief sought was to issue a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent authorities to redesign the bridge construction after hearing and considering the objections of the public at large. On the presentation of the writ petition, the notice was issued to the respondents on 15.06.2017 and affidavits have been filed to bring on record the details with regard to the

design etc.

2. The only assertion made by the learned advocate for the petitioners in order to maintain this petition is that the bridge has been constructed by the respondent as against the oath made by them on affidavit before this Court. Much emphasis has been laid to the averments made in the affidavit of the respondent to assert that inspite of the assurance given before this Court on oath, the bridge has not been constructed

as per the plan prepared by the respondent.

3. Thus, the submission is that an inquiry is required to be conducted into the matter pertaining to the design and the

construction of bridge.

4. Be that as it may, for the fact that the construction of the bridge is now complete, during the pendency of the present petition, in our opinion, the cause of action for filing the present petition does not survive. No roving inquiry can be conducted as prayed for. The present petition is accordingly

dismissed, as infructous with the efÒux of time.

Page 2 of 3 Uploaded by SHRIJIT PILLAI(HC01400) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 07:29:34 IST 2026

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/WPPIL/135/2017 ORDER DATED: 27/03/2026

0.5421563908914395

5. In view of disposal of main matter, connected Civil Application(s) would not survive and is/are disposed of

accordingly.

(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )

(D.N.RAY,J)

SHRIJIT PILLAI

Page 3 of 3 Uploaded by SHRIJIT PILLAI(HC01400) on Mon Apr 06 2026 Downloaded on : Sat Apr 11 07:29:34 IST 2026