VIKRAMSINH SATUBHA SODHA Vs. ISHWARDAN CHENDAN GADHVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.Mehul Sharad Shah, learned advocate, waives service of notice of Rule for opponents Nos.1 and 2 (original petitioners), Mr.Vishrut Jani, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for opponents Nos.3 and 4 and Mr.Kirit R. Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of Mr.H.S.Munshaw, learned advocate, waives service of notice of Rule for opponent No.5. Opponent No.6 (who is respondent No.4 in the petition) has been served in the petition but none appears on his behalf, therefore, there is no requirement of issuance of notice of Rule to him in the present application.

(2.) This application has been preferred by the applicant with a prayer to join him as party respondent in Special Civil Application No.8003 of 2016, preferred by present opponents Nos.1 and 2.

(3.) It is the case of the applicant that he has made a complaint to the Taluka Development Officer (opponent No.5) regarding the aspect that the original petitioners are running a Hospital by encroaching upon a portion of Gauchar land. That opponent No.1 is not a bona fide purchaser as he has misguided the authorities and obtained permission. The Deputy Collector has granted a Certificate without properly verifying documents and has passed an order on 21.08.2009, permitting opponent No.2 Trust to purchase the land, subject to certain conditions.