BAMBHANIYA NARENDRABHAI RAMESHBHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE . Mr Krunal Pandya, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of Rule for the respondents. At the request of the learned counsel for the parties, the matters are taken up for final hearing today with the Civil Application.

(2.) THE petitioner has challenged the action of the respondents of sealing his restaurant on the ground that the requisite permission/licence has not been obtained by the petitioner. The petitioner is having his restaurant adjoining to the National High Way running between Chhotila and Rajkot. The restaurant is at Chhotila and it is named Kannaiyalal Hotel.

(3.) I have heard Mr B.M.Mangukia for the petitioners and Mr Krunal Pandya, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. It is submitted by Mr Mangukia that under the provisions of Clause (x)(a) of Section 33 of the Bombay Police Act if the restaurant or eating house is not possessing the registration including grant of certificate of registration, etc., the maximum action that can be taken is in accordance with Section 131A of the Act. I have perused the said Section which provides for the action that maybe taken if somebody fails to obtain the licence under the Act with regard to eating house. It says that if the person is found guilty of committing the breach can be punished with fine, which may extend to Rs.50. Mr Mangukiya has based his submission on this Section and has contended that, at the most, the petitioner can be asked to pay fine of Rs.50 and that too upon complaint being filed before the concerned Magistrate and upon Magistrate finding him guilty of committing the offence. He has further submitted that the other persons who are similarly situated have been granted regularisation by the concerned authority and the petitioner has been denied the same. Therefore, there is hostile discrimination. Lastly, he has submitted that against the order of the Collector refusing the regularisation the petitioner had preferred appeal before the Secretary, Revenue Department and the Joint Secretary by the order dated 27.12.2006 remanded the matter for reconsideration making certain observations in favour of the petitioner.