RAJESHWARI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. A. I. Saiyed, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Rituraj Meena, the learned advocate for the writ- applicant and Mr. Rutvij M. Bhatt, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.3 through video conference.

(2.) By way of this writ-application, which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ-applicant has prayed for the following reliefs :-

(3.) The writ-applicant by way of present writ-application is aggrieved by an order dtd. 6/10/2016 passed by the respondent No.3 on the ground that though the application of the writ-applicant was with respect to five plots only one plot i.e. plot No.16 was allotted to the writ-applicant. Mr. Saiyed, learned Senior Advocate relied on the noting at page 119 and submitted that the authority ought not to have cancelled the allotment of the remaining plots Nos.13, 14, 15 and 56. At this stage, Mr. Saiyed, the learned Senior Advocate submitted that the representations dtd. 20/9/2016, 18/10/2016, 16/1/2017, 19/1/2017, 9/5/2017, 17/1/2018, 21/8/2018 annexed as "Annexure I colly" and "N colly" [as per prayer 9(B)] are pending adjudication. He submitted that the respondent authority may decide the said representations as expeditiously as possible.