Gujarat High Court
Rameshbhai Ukkadbhai Vasava vs State Of Gujarat on 6 December, 2022
Bench: Biren Vaishnav
C/SCA/1389/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1389 of 2020
==========================================================
RAMESHBHAI UKKADBHAI VASAVA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NIRAV R MISHRA(6140) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR.ROHAN SHAH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIREN VAISHNAV
Date : 06/12/2022
ORAL ORDER
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Mr.Rohan Shah
learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on
behalf of the respondent State.
2. With the consent of learned advocates for the
respective parties, the petition is taken up for
final hearing.
3. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed
that the respondent authorities be directed to
C/SCA/1389/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2022
consider the case of the petitioner and his
application be declared under the "saved cases"
(keeping in lieu of the directions issued by this
Hon'ble Court in common C.A.V. Judgement
passed by this Hon'ble Court dated 29.04.2016 in
Special Civil Application No.20552 of 2015
preferred by the petitioner).
4. It is the case of the petitioner that he had
approached this Court by filing Special Civil
Application No.20552 of 2015 challenging the
order of the Collector which was confirmed by
the Revisional Authority, by which, the
application of the petitioner for grant of quarry
lease was rejected. According to the petitioner,
who was the petitioner of Special Civil
Application No.20852 of 2015, had applied for
quarry lease for the area opposite survey no.203,
263, on the riverbed of river Narmada,
C/SCA/1389/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2022
Village:Indroda, Taluka:Ghadiya, the application
was rejected by the Collector on the ground that
the area under demand was included in the block
area. That order was confirmed by the
Revisional Authority. While disposing of the
petitions as dismissed, the Court in para 11.1
observed as under:
"11.1 However, the following directions
shall govern in respect of the applications of
the petitioners and grant of quarry lease by
the authorities.
(i) The application for grant of quarry lease
made by each of the petitioner in the
captioned petitions shall not be treated as
closed by virtue of the present order;
(ii) The applications shall remain alive. The
request of the petitioners for grant of quarry
lease shall be considered at the time of
disposal of the quarry lease area concerned,
if the competent authority decides to make
available the area for the purpose of grant
of quarry;
(iii) At such relevant time, the application of
the petitioners-applicants, if they so chose,
shall be considered in accordance with law
and the norms of policy as may be prevalent
at that time;
C/SCA/1389/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2022
(iv) The respondent-State authorities shall
be necessarily guided by the law laid down
by this Court in Patel Vishnubhai
Maganbhai (supra) and the same, in
general, stand informed and guided by the
principle of fairness and equality in the
matter of allotment of quarry lease as
emphasised by the Apex Court in Sulekhan
Singh (supra), in particular the principle
underlined in paragraph 20 of the judgment,
and the proposition laid down in the present
order;
(v) The impugned orders are not interfered
with and are maintained for the discussion
and reasons hereinabove. All the petitions
stand disposed of as dismissed, however
qualified by the aforesaid directions.
Notices in each of the petition stand
discharged. No order as to cost.
5. Mr.Mishra learned counsel for the petitioner
would highlight the directions issued by this
Court in para 11.1(i) as reproduced herein above
which observes that the application shall remain
alive. He would therefore submit that his case
would fall in 'saved cases'.
6. In support of his submissions, Mr.Mishra would
C/SCA/1389/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2022
rely on an order dated 28.04.2022 passed by the
coordinate bench of this Court in Special Civil
Application No.7750 of 2021.
7. Mr.Rohan Shah learned AGP would submit that
the order relied upon by the learned counsel for
the petitioner was in cases where applications
were pending before the Collector for decision
on remand and the same therefore will not apply
to the facts of the present case.
8. Reading of the order dated 28.04.2022 and
reading of the observations made in the order in
case of the petitioner, the authorities will have to
consider the application of the petitioner in light
of the observations made in 11.1(i) thereof,
where the Court observed that the applications
shall remain alive. The effect of such an
observation whether would make the case of the
C/SCA/1389/2020 ORDER DATED: 06/12/2022
applicant eligible to be one in 'saved cases' has
to be considered by the authorities in accordance
with law.
9. Such consideration shall be done within six
weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this
order.
10.The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extend.
Direct service is permitted.
(BIREN VAISHNAV, J)
ANKIT SHAH
