PRASHANT MANUBHAI VORA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these matters are filed at pre- execution stage of an orders under the Gujarat Prevention of Anti-social Activities Act,1985 (hereinafter referred to as "PASA"). In all the matters the orders have: been passed to detain the respective petitioners as property grabber, a term defined under sec. 2(h)of the PASA.

(2.) The matters being at pre-execution stage, the scope of the petition itself is very much limited. For this purpose, Supreme Court decisions are relied on by the respective Counsels of the respective petitioners. The matters having been admitted, in its return, the State in all the matters has also concentrated on the fact that the scope of the petition is, indeed, limited. The leading case in the field is of Alka Gadia reported in Judgment Today 1991 (1) Supreme Court page 549. This is followed by a decision in M.K.Bapna's case reported in Judgment Today 1992 (4) Supreme Court page 49.

(3.) Five catagories have been carved out by the Supreme Court in Alka Gadia's case and the paragraph containing these details has been quoted in M.K.Bapna's case also at page 52. The five categories of the type of cases thus, enunciated are as under: (1) That the impugned order is not passed under the Act under which it is purported to have been passed. (2) That it is sought to be executed against a wrong person. (3) That it is passed for a wrong purpose. (4) That it is passed on vague, extraneous and irrelevant grounds. (5) That the authority which passed it, had no authority to do so.