PITAMBARBHAI HARIBHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Pursuant to order passed by this Court on 15th November 2010, whereby the petitioners were directed to see that the encroachment made is removed at the earliest, learned advocate Mr.Sharma, on instructions from his clients, makes a statement before the Court that the petitioners did remove the encroachment. The learned advocate further states, on instructions from his clients, that there was no 'pucca' construction, it was only 'kutcha wada' and that has been vacated by the petitioners.

(2.) In light of that statement the Court does not pass any further order of recovery of rent from the petitioners from the date they claimed possession of the land in question, viz. 1988.

(3.) Heard learned advocate Mr.Niraj J. Sharma for the petitioners. Mr.Sharma vehemently submitted that the auction which took place on 21st January 1988 was not legal and there were various flaws in the auction as the authorities did not comply with necessary provisions for the same. Besides that the case of the petitioners is that as the land is adjoining to the residential premises of the petitioners and the petitioners are in possession of the land and they are using that land for keeping their cattle; the authorities ought to have considered the application filed by the petitioners as early as on 27th August 1985, a copy of which is produced at page 16 and thereafter another application dated 10th February 1987, a copy of which is produced at page 15. It is contended by the learned advocate that the authorities ought to have considered the request of the petitioners and ought to have granted the land to the petitioners.