RAMJIBHAI NARANBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have challenged an order dated 31. 3. 2003 passed by the Collector Mehsana, as upheld by an order dated 2. 8. 2003 passed by the Deputy Secretary, Urban Development and Urban Housing Department. Learned advocate Shri A. J. Patel for the petitioners and learned advocate Shri P. K. Jani for respondents No. 5 and 6 submitted that the Collector acted on an application filed by the said respondents. However, during the pendency of this petition, issues have been settled between the parties and private respondents are not interested in pursuing the litigation. However, I find that question pertains to use of land which the petitioners wish to put it to and Collector has made certain observations which would suggest that at relevant time, use of the land which the petitioners wanted to put it to was not found to be in accordance with law. That being the position it is not possible for me to terminate this litigation simply because respondents no. 5 and 6 do not wish to pursue to the same. Learned advocate Shri A. J. Patel however, submitted that the petitioners are in a position to satisfy the Collector that there is no breach on part of the petitioners.

(2.) FOR the above purpose it would be appropriate for the petitioners to make a representation to the Collector pointing out the exact use that the petitioners shall put the land in question to and whether such use would be in tune with the development permission and prevalent rules and regulations. If such representation is made within a period of two months from today, same shall be examined in accordance with law unmindful of impugned order. Representation shall be disposed of by a Speaking Order. Until such time same is done, all sides shall maintain status-quo as on today. With above directions, petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the above extent. I have expressed no opinion on any of the aspects of the matter.