1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred by the petitioners herein for the following main reliefs:
"12(B) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus quashing and setting aside notice dated 26.4.2012 (Annexure-B) issued to the residents of Shastrinagar Chhapra and the respondent authority be directed to implement its own Resolution bearing No.30/2012-13 dated 11.4.2012 (Annexure-A) passed by Standing Committee, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation for providing alternative arrangement.
(C) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent authority to stay the eviction of present petitioners unless and until providing alternative arrangement as per Resolution bearing No.30/2012-13 dated 11.4.2012."
2. In response to the Notice issued by this Court, Mr.Maulin Rawal, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Mr.Rahul Dave, learned Assistant Government Pleader has appeared on behalf of respondent Nos.3 and 4. Affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2 affirmed by Rameshbhai Kanchanbhai Tadvi, In-charge Deputy Estate Officer (NZ), Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and in paragraph No.2, it is stated that as per the resolution passed by the respondent-corporation, the Corporation has passed such resolution, which shows its readiness and willingness to implement the resolution as prayed by the petitioners by providing alternative arrangement at Village: Piplaj site and service at south zone. It is also stated that respondent- corporation is ready and willing to implement the resolution and that is why subsequent notice for eviction has been given to the hutments. It is stated at the bar that respondent-corporation shall not evict the hutments without giving them alternative arrangement, as per the resolution.
3. In view of the above, respondents more particularly respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed not to evict the petitioners from their respective huts till they are provided alternative accommodation at Piplaj site, as per resolution of the Corporation and after providing alternative accommodation, the petitioners can be evicted. The concerned respondents are directed to act as per the affidavit-in-reply dated 17/05/2012. With this, the present petition is disposed of.
Direct service is permitted.
[M.R.SHAH,J] *dipti Top