VASANTKUMAR HARJIBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed with the following prayers :-

(2.) The main objection of the learned Advocate for the petitioner is that the petitioner who are the affected parties as provided under Section 52 of The Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to in short as 'the Act') have made representations to the Town Planning Officer and also to the higher authority wherein the Additional Chief Town Planner at Gandhinagar had issued a letter dated 14.09.2018 asking the Town Planning Officer to take into consideration the representation made by the petitioner and others with regard to the Town Planning Scheme No.35, (Kumbharia-Saroli-Saniaahmad-Devadh) with regard to Block No.57, Original Plot No.169, Final Plot No.169.

(3.) It is submitted that despite this, the petitioner apprehends that without undertaking the procedure required more particularly, the decision to be taken as provided under Rule 26 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to in short as 'the Rules'), the Town Planning Officer may forward the Scheme and thereby, the representation and the objections of the petitioner may remain undecided. It is submitted that it is on account of the newspaper report that the petitioner has come to know that the Town Planning Officer may at any stage forward the said Town Planning Scheme. It is submitted that as the right is available to the petitioner in the statute to make representation and file his objection as a necessary corollary, he may also be communicated with the outcome of such representation and objections.