M.R. PARIKH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has challenged the notice dated 28.04.06 issued by the concerned Mamlatdar calling upon him to make payment of Rs. 138000/- to the State or else he would be proceeded against and the same will be recovered by way of land revenue on the ground that the said notice was not in consonance with law and therefore the same deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(2.) The facts in brief deserve to be set out as under:

(3.) Mr. M.R. Parikh, party-in-person submitted that till date when the representation has not been decided, it was not open to the respondents to effect recovery and therefore the order of recovery deserves to be quashed and set aside. He submitted that the recovery is in fact essentially sought to be effected on account of his undertaking given to the Court and therefore when the Division Bench of this Court directed the respondent State as well as the University to consider his representation it was not open to the respondent to straightaway order recovery without disposing of the representation. In other words the direction issued by this Court in Letters Patent Appeal has remained non-complied.