Punjiben Vithalbhai Vaghari vs State Of Gujarat
2023 Latest Caselaw 6332 Guj

                                                                                    NEUTRAL CITATION




     C/LPA/930/2023                                  ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023

                                                                                     undefined




     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

       R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 930 of 2023
                          In
     R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20341 of 2019

=============================================
                      PUNJIBEN VITHALBHAI VAGHARI
                                 Versus
                            STATE OF GUJARAT
=============================================
Appearance:
MR. JAINISH P SHAH(7033) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR ANUJ K TRIVEDI(6251) for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4
=============================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
      SUNITA AGARWAL
      and
      HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P.
      MAYEE

                            Date : 29/08/2023
                             ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. The instant appeal is directed against the order of

the learned Single Judge dated 17.10.2022 whereby the

prayer made by the petitioner for allotment of an

alternative accommodation in the proceeding for

rehabilitation of the slum dwellers uprooted in the

execution of the project named Sabarmati Riverfront

Development Project, had been rejected. The judgment

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/LPA/930/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023

undefined

impugned categorically records that the Corporation has

taken a decision in the year 2015 that since no one from

the list of untraceable persons remained present before

the Corporation for allotment of alternative

accommodation, the project was declared closed and the

remaining units were allotted to other persons.

2. It is an admitted fact of the matter that the writ

petitioner / appellant herein who claims to be the noticee

in the rehabilitation process, did not come forward to

approach the competent authority to take possession of

the alternative site offered by the Corporation for a

period of 8 years. After completion of the project, at this

stage, i.e. after a period of more than 8 years, the

petitioner is claiming that she could not be available at

the time of physical survey of the premises due to illness

of her husband and as such she could not be allotted the

alternative accommodation.

3. There is no dispute about the fact that the name of

the petitioner was recorded in the list of displaced

NEUTRAL CITATION

C/LPA/930/2023 ORDER DATED: 29/08/2023

undefined

persons who were having their hutment in the area

covered by Sabarmati Riverfront Development Project.

The name of the writ petitioner is also entered in the list

of unidentified persons, which is appended with the writ

petition.

4. However, the fact remains that the project itself has

been completed in the year 2015 and as per the claim of

the Corporation, there is no accommodation available,

inasmuch as, the remaining units have been allotted to

other persons. After closure of the project, we do not find

it a fit case for interference. It may be noted that the

allotment of alternative accommodation was completed

by issuance of public notice at the end of the Corporation

and no infirmity could be pointed out in the process.

5. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the

challenge. The appeal is accordingly, dismissed.

(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )

(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.) Bharat