KRISHNABEN NATUBHAI JETANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

(2.) . In view of the relief prayed for, when specific query was put to learned advocate Mr.Harshad Patel appearing for the petitioner as to how the petitioner is aggrieved by some alleged unauthorized encroachment carried out by respondent No.5 on a public road, 8 meters on the Eastern side and 9 meters on the Northern side of plot Nos.237 and 238, learned advocate for the petitioner had no answer. He submitted that plot Nos.237 and 238 belong to the petitioner and the aforesaid encroachment affects the petitioner. If that is so, if the petitioner is aggrieved of some of the encroachment made by respondent No.5 in that case, no actions can be directed against the respondent No.5 through Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation as Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation is competent to take care of its interest and take care of any alleged unauthorized construction or encroachment.

(3.) It seems that the petitioner is aggrieved by some action on the part of the respondent No.5, which may affect the petitioner in her personal capacity and if that is so, it is open for the petitioner to prefer civil suit for protection of her civil rights. As the petitioner could not establish any locus to file the present petition and this petition not being Public Interest Litigation and looking to the nature of the petition, the same is not required to be entertained and accordingly not entertained. Even as per the Bombay Provincial Municipal Act, 1949 there is a specific mechanism for removal of encroachment on public roads and if there is any encroachment, the corporation will take necessary actions, but it should not be at the instance of the petitioner.