Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Gujarat
  4. /
  5. 2012
  6. /
  7. January

M vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|13 June, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

1. Leave to amend cause title. The amendment to be carried out forthwith so as to add Bombay Police Act in the cause title as subject matter.
2. Heard Mr. P.P. Majmudar, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr. Alkesh Shah, learned AGP for the respondent authorities.
3.The petitioner has taken out present petition seeking below mentioned relief:-
"21 (A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the concerned respondent authorities to see to it that the road in question is opened immediately, so that the trucks / vehicles of the petitioner are permitted to reach the site, at which the mining / excavation work is to be done, pursuant to the Agreement dtd. 5/4/2012 (Annexure- "A" hereto) and also further be pleased to direct the concerned respondent authorities to ensure that, in future also, there is no blockade created by local villagers and / or head strong persons and / or local gram panchayat, so that the work of excavation of sand can be carried out by the petitioner smoothly without any hurdle or disturbance;
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the concerned respondent authority - Collector, Gandhinagar - respondent No.2, to extend the period of contract of the petitioner for the period during which the petitioner could not carry out the work of mining / excavation of sand by using his vehicles / trucks due to blockade of road and so that there is no financial loss to the petitioner.
(C) ........
(D)........."
4. The aforesaid reliefs have been requested for in view of the factual background narrated in the petition which is to the effect that the petitioner has been awarded licence for excavating mines and transporting the same from Survey No./Block No.2, situate at village Delwada, Taluka; Mansa, District: Gandhinagar. The petitioner has alleged that the local people have blockade the road and they are not allowing the ingress and egress to the petitioner's vehicle and consequently the petitioner is facing difficulty in executing the contract awarded to him. It is also clarified by the petitioner that he approached the concerned respondent authorities viz. District Collector and the District Superintendent of Police, however any actions have yet not been taken.
5. The petitioner has also heavily relied on the orders dated 13.5.2011 and 14.6.2011 passed by the Division Bench in SCA No.5750 of 2011 and also on the orders dated 9.3.2012 in SCA Nos. 3052 of 2012 and 3080 of 2012 and has submitted that despite such direction by the Court, though in other cases, the concerned authorities are not taking any action. He submitted that the responsibility to maintain law and order situation is of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 however any steps have not been taken by the said authorities.
6. Having regard to the facts mentioned in the petition and orders passed in SCA No.3052 of 2012 and SCA No.3080 of 2012, learned AGP has submitted that appropriate instruction to the concerned authorities will be conveyed and they will be asked to take steps in accordance with the orders dated 9.3.2012 and 15.3.2012 passed by the Court in SCA No.3052 of 2012 and in SCA No.3080 of 2012.
7. Therefore, present petition is disposed of with below mentioned observations and directions.
(A) The petitioner is permitted to serve copy of present oder directly to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
(B) The petitioner is also permitted to supply copy of the orders dated 9.3.2012 and 15.3.2012 passed by the Court in SCA No.3052 of 2012 and in SCA No.3080 of 2012 and also the order dated 13.5.2011 passed by the Division Bench in SCA No.5750 of 2011.
(C) Learned AGP shall also forward copies of the said orders as well as this order to the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall take necessary actions as are required to facilitate the execution of the contract awarded to the petitioner and to ensure that the blockade, if any, are removed and the petitioner is not obstructed by unauthorized persons.
With the aforesaid clarification and direction the petition stands disposed of accordingly. Direct service is permitted.
(K.M.THAKER,J.) Suresh* Top
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
13 June, 2012