SHAILESHBHAI MATHURBHAI KATHROTIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned advocate Mr. Kaushal Pandya make a statement upon instructions from the respondent Nos.4, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14 and 15 that the respondents have made respective applications for regularizing there alleged unauthorized constructions and therefore, in view of the provisions of GRUDA Act, 2022 during the pendency of that applications for regularization, any action, order or notice for removal of alleged unauthorized constructions would remain suspended till its considered by the Designated Authority. Learned advocate Mr. Kaushal Pandya further states that by way of this petition, the respondents are seeking direction against the Surat Urban Development Authority for removal of alleged unauthorized construction put up by the respondents, who are represented by learned advocate Mr. Kaushal Pandya.

(2.) In view of the fact that GRUDA Act, 2022 specifically provides that during pendency of the application, the aforesaid action, order or notice would remain suspended, nothing would survive in this petition at this stage. If any of the party, aggrieved by the order that the Designated Authority may pass, there is a remedy of filing appeal under Sec. 12 order and therefore, in view of that present petition is disposed of at this stage.

(3.) It is clarified that this Court has not gone into merits of the matter.