USHABEN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 2.3.2018 passed by respondent no.3, whereby it is ordered that the petitioner shall not enter the limits of Surat city, Surat Rural, Tapi, Navsari and Bharuch districts, for a period of two years.

(2.) The facts in brief of the case are that the petitioner on account of alleged offence being III CR No.12 of 2017 under the Prohibition Act, the respondent authority has issued show cause notice dated 5.1.2018 calling upon the petitioner to explain as to why he should not be externed from the areas mentioned therein. In response to the said show cause notice, the petitioner appeared and has requested the authority to recall the notice. The respondent authority by virtue of order dated 2.3.2018 passed an order of externing the petitioner not to indulge into the activities from Surat city, Surat Rural, Tapi, Navsari districts, for a period of two years and it is this order, which has been made the subject matter of the present petition.

(3.) When the matter is taken up for hearing, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner has vehemently contended that here is a case in which the extreme exercise of power against the petitioner is based upon the past dispute but are not in any way affecting the public at large. 3. 1 It has been further pointed out that so far as other districts are concerned, there is no material whatsoever of any nature which would permit the authority to exercise such kind of drastic power by sending the petitioner away from those districts in which undisputedly there is no material and further learned advocate has submitted that there is no justification as to why the petitioner has been externed for a period of two years. Therefore, this entire exercise against the petitioner reflects clear arbitrariness, discrimination and violation of the principles of natural justice and also reflects clear non application of mind and as such this exercise of jurisdiction is totally uncalled for and hence the relief prayed for in the petition deserves to be granted. Learned advocate has further submitted that these issues are very much covered by the decision of the coordinate Bench and hence on the basis of the such principle of law laid down by various decisions also, the impugned order requires to be quashed and set aside. Learned advocate for the petitioner has further contended that even the offences for which petitioner has been attributed are under the Prohibition Act which is pending. No other submissions have been made.