AJAYKUMAR DWARKADAS AMIN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has made following prayers in para 21 of the petition: -

(2.) IT appears that in respect of his land, the petitioner had preferred a civil suit, being Special Civil Suit No.64 of 1974, seeking damages for pulling down the compound wall made by him wherein amongst other State authorities, the respondent No.2 - Waghjipur Gram Panchayat was also a party defendant. In such suit, the petitioner was awarded damages of Rs.2,000/ - to be recovered from other State authorities for mental agony, however the claim for damages for demolition of the compound wall was refused. The suit against respondent No.2 Panchayat was dismissed. Such decision of the Trial Court came to be confirmed by this Court in First Appeal No.1538 of 1980 and First Appeal No.82 of 1981. It appears that the respondent No.2 Gram Panchayat then issued notice dated 28.12.2009 under Section 104(1) of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1993 ("the Act") asking the petitioner to remove unauthorized construction made on his land. The petitioner had then preferred Special Civil Application No.3465 of 2010, which was not pressed with a view to make an appropriate application to the Gram Panchayat for permission to construct compound wall, as proposed by the petitioner. It appears that thereafter, the petitioner made application dated 27.3.2010 to the respondent No.2 Gram Panchayat seeking permission to construct compound wall on his land bearing Survey No.180/1B admeasuring 8094 Sq. Mtrs. It further appears from the communication dated 17.4.2010 addressed by the respondent No.2 Gram Panchayat to the petitioner, copy whereof is annexed with the Affidavit -in -Reply filed by the Sarpanch of respondent No.2 Gram Panchayat, that no order is made on the application made by the petitioner dated 27.3.2010 on the ground that the said application was not made in prescribed format.

(3.) LEARNED advocate Mr. Hemang Shah appearing for the petitioner submitted that the compound wall surrounding the land of the petitioner was already in existence, however since the same was damaged by encroachers, the petitioner was carrying out repairing of such wall. Mr. Shah submitted that while carrying out repairs, the petitioner had to substantially put up a new compound wall and for such purpose, if any permission was required from the Gram Panchayat, the petitioner was agreeable to make application and therefore, the petitioner withdrew the earlier petition with a view make such application seeking permission to put up construction of the compound wall. Mr. Shah submitted that the petitioner has made such application which has not been decided on the ground that the petitioner had not made application in proper format.