AMBALAL CHUNILAL RAVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS in SCA No.6080 of 2010 are residents of Dakor and applicants in Revision Application No.25 of 2009 in which impugned order dated 3.4.2010 is made dismissing the revision application of the petitioners and confirming order dated 6.7.2009 of Collector, Kheda. Order dated 6.7.2009, which was under challenge in revision, is an elaborate order made under section 258 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act in the application of respondent No.5 herein whereby Resolution No.56 dated 28.7.2008 of Dakor Nagarpalika was suspended. And that Resolution No.56 is the resolution by which permission for construction on the land bearing survey No.2048/3 of village Dakor has been denied to respondent No.5.

(2.) THE relevant facts leading to the present litigation are that respondent No.5 was running an agency for supplying LPG gas and was required to construct godown for the purpose of storing gas cylinders. He has obtained necessary permissions and no-objection certificates from the District Magistrate, Kheda as well as the Joint Chief Controller of Explosives, West Circle, Navi Mumbai. Respondent No.5 has also obtained permission for non-agricultural use of the land, subject to various conditions, including the condition to take necessary precautionary measures in case of fire or accident. THE objections against grant of N.A. Permission to respondent No.5 have been rejected and the order granting N.A. Permission is stated to be subject-matter of another revision application, but the applicant therein is not a party before this Court. 2.1 As elaborately stated in the order dated 23.3.2009 (dated 6.7.2009) of the Collector in the application under section 258 of the Municipalities Act, at the time of granting permission for non-agricultural use of the land, opinions of other authorities were obtained and Dakor Municipality had also given an opinion favourable to respondent No.5. THErefore, while opposing the application of respondent No.5 before the Collector, the Chief Officer and the President of Dakor Municipality had taken inconsistent stand in opposing the appeal of respondent No.5 and stated new grounds which were duly dealt with by the Collector in his order. Those grounds dealt with in the order dated 6.7.2009 of the Collector were sought to be re-agitated in the revision application of the petitioners and again they have been duly dealt with in an elaborate discussion in the impugned order of Deputy Secretary of Urban Development and Urban Housing Department.

(3.) IN the above facts and circumstances and perusing the impugned order, it is clear that it is made after due application of mind to the relevant facts and respondent No.5 could not have been denied the right to construct upon the land in question and utilize such construction for storage of gas cylinders even after and subject to all the permissions and approvals granted to him. It clearly appears that the petitioners have sought to create hurdles in the way of construction by respondent No.5 on his own land and indirectly caused disruption of public utility service of supplying cooking gas to the residents of the area.