SCA/26392/2022 of MUKESHBHAI BHOLARAM PATEL Vs STATE OF GUJARAT on 30 December 2022

1. When the matter is called out today, learnedAdvocate Mr. Kaushal D. Pandya submits that he hasinstructions to appear for the respondent No.2 –Surat Mahanagar Palika and seeks permission to filehis Vakalatnama. Advocate Mr. Kaushal D. Pandya submits that he hasinstructions to appear for the respondent No.2 –Surat Mahanagar Palika and seeks permission to filehis Vakalatnama.

2. Permission as prayed for is granted.

3. It is submitted by learned Advocate Mr. Kaushal D.Pandya that the Notice issued on 09.12.2022 isrequired to be read in context that within 15 days ofthe notice, the person in whose possession or anyother affected person would have the right torepresent the authority. It is submitted that thepetitioners were required to approach the SuratMahanagar Palika with their representation and theconcerned authority would have heard them. It isalso submitted that instead of coming to this Court,the petitioners ought to have approached theauthority raising their rights and disputes on theconcerned land. Pandya that the Notice issued on 09.12.2022 isrequired to be read in context that within 15 days ofthe notice, the person in whose possession or anyother affected person would have the right torepresent the authority. It is submitted that thepetitioners were required to approach the SuratMahanagar Palika with their representation and theconcerned authority would have heard them. It isalso submitted that instead of coming to this Court,the petitioners ought to have approached theauthority raising their rights and disputes on theconcerned land.

4. Countering the above, learned Advocate Mr. KartikeyKanojiya for learned Advocate Mr. Dilip L. KanojiyaKanojiya for learned Advocate Mr. Dilip L. Kanojiya submits that the said notice does not clarify the rightof the petitioners of representing themselves beforethe concerned authority and/or to make arepresentation in connection with the land which hasbeen ordered to be handed over to Surat MahanagarPalika within 15 days of the notice.

5. Without entering into the merits of the case, thisCourt is of the view that the Surat Mahanagar Palikahears the petitioners and also permit the petitionersto make a representation along with the relevant /related documents, so that the principle of naturaljustice and the right to be heard be maintained. Court is of the view that the Surat Mahanagar Palikahears the petitioners and also permit the petitionersto make a representation along with the relevant /related documents, so that the principle of naturaljustice and the right to be heard be maintained.

6. In the result, it is directed that the petitioners hereinapproach the Surat Mahanagar Palika on JANUARY 9,2023 with their representation along with the relevantdocuments and the concerned Officer of the NagarPalika to hear the petitioners and decide the same.During this period, no coercive action be taken bythe Nagarpalika against the petitioners. approach the Surat Mahanagar Palika on JANUARY 9,2023 with their representation along with the relevantdocuments and the concerned Officer of the NagarPalika to hear the petitioners and decide the same.During this period, no coercive action be taken bythe Nagarpalika against the petitioners.

7. It is also made clear that if at all any adverse ordersare passed against the petitioners, then no furtherare passed against the petitioners, then no further action be taken for a week qua the petitioners so asto enable the petitioners to challenge the said orderas the concerned property bears the residentialpremises of the petitioners.

8. The petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms.Direct Service is permitted TODAY. Direct Service is permitted TODAY.

CAROLINE

Sd/-(GITA GOPI, J)