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

Tarachandbhai vs State

High Court Of Gujarat|23 February, 2012

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard Mr.R.C.Kakkad, learned advocate for the petitioners. It is submitted by him that some of the petitioners are having shops and some of them are tenants of shops and others have their residences in the area between Patel Samaj and Janta Phatak (Ranjitnagar). As per the sanctioned Revised Development Plan, the existing road, which is 30 feet wide from the statue of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel to Raghuvir Society and 40 feet from Raghuvir Society to Indira Marg, is proposed to be widened to 60 feet. If the road is widened, as proposed, the entire construction, or substantial portion in some cases, containing shops and residences of the petitioners would be demolished and the petitioners would be rendered without any means of livelihood.
It is further submitted that, on the opposite side of the road, there is a huge vacant plot and the widening of the road can be done by using some portion of that plot, instead of demolishing the shops and residences of the petitioners.
That, the initiation of proceedings by issuing Notice under Section 210 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 ("the Act" for short), that has been published in the Newspaper on 06.11.2009, is not in accordance with law. Section 469 of the Act lays down how public notices are to be made known. The said notices are to be given under the signature of the Commissioner or by a Municipal Officer empowered under Section 69 of the Act to give the same. That, as per Section 69(2) of the Act, the Commissioner shall not, except with the prior approval of the Standing Committee, make an order under Section 69(1) affecting his powers, duties or functions under Section 210 of the Act. That the Standing Committee has passed a Resolution on 01.07.2010 and it is only after the Resolution of the Standing Committee that a Notice under Section 210 of the Act could have been issued. Instead of this, the Notice has been issued on 06.11.2009, which is not as per the provisions of the Act.
Issue Notice returnable on 19.03.2012.
Status-quo, as it exists today, qua the shops/ residences of the petitioners, shall be maintained till then.
Direct Service of this order, today, is permitted.
(Smt.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.) (sunil) 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

Tarachandbhai vs State

Court

High Court Of Gujarat

JudgmentDate
23 February, 2012