ARVINDBHAI NARSHIBHAI PARMAR Vs. ASSISTANT TOWN PLANNER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed for setting aside communication dtd. 30/3/2016 and for further direction that the respondent-Corporation may make necessary inquiry of the land in question where the petitioner is carrying on his business. Alternatively, direction is sought to consider objections of the petitioner and pass a detailed order by assigning reasons.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is having his place of business on city survey No.3640, ward No.12, where, from the newspapers as well as from the officers of the respondent-Corporation felt threatened that the shops of the petitioners would be demolished.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that communication dtd. 30/3/2016 does not assign any reason why written representation of the petitioner dtd. 1/2/2016 came to be rejected. It is submitted that the impugned communication cannot be said to be an order as contemplated under Sec. 260 of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act and as the said communication is not in accordance with the provisions and as there is absence of any hearing, principle of natural justice is not followed and hence, is required to be set aside.