(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)
1. Heard learned senior advocate, Mr.K.M.Patel, for the appellant, original respondent No.3. Learned senior advocate invited the attention of the Court to order passed by the learned Single Judge on 11th September, 2013; whereby, notice was issued returnable on 3rd October, 2013 but in the meantime, learned Single Judge has stayed the order impugned in the petition.
2. Learned senior advocate for the appellant invited the attention of the Court to the fact that petition is filed by the Municipality which is no more having the role of 'implementing agency' to be played, there is already a body created i.e. Himmatnagar Urban Development Authority which is the implementing authority under the Act.
3. Beside that, the order impugned is by which the Government agreed to reduce the width of the road to 12 Mtr. and in doing so, petitioner was to contribute 4.5 Mtr. wide strip for widening the road and for that, he agreed that he will not be claiming any compensation. It is the proposal of the appellant which was accepted by the Government. It is that order which is sought to be stayed.
4. Learned senior advocate explains that by staying of the order impugned in the petition, the Municipality will start paving the road and depriving the petitioner by his entire land for width of 18 Mtr.
5. Hence, ADMIT.
(RAVI R.TRIPATHI, J.) (MOHINDER PAL, J.) ashish Page 2 of 2