Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 6514 Guj
Judgement Date : 5 September, 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1059/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1059 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12738 of 2016
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1059 of 2023
==========================================================
MAGANBHAI DAHYABHAI CHAUHAN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Appellant(s) No. 1,2,3
for the Respondent(s) No. 10,11,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,8.1,8.2,8.3,9
MR UTKARSH SHARMA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 05/09/2023
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. The instant Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 13.04.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge in rejecting the application for joining party in Special Civil Application No.12738 of 2016. The appellants herein filed the application being Civil Application No.1 of 2022 with the assertion that the owners of survey Nos.31/1, 31/2, 31/3 and 31/4 have preferred Special Civil Application Nos.7939 of 2009, 8088 of 2009 and 7943 of 2009 which had been withdrawn by them vide order dated 25.08.2009 and this Court had permitted them to file a fresh petition. In the said application, there is no averments that the applicants were parties
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1059/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
to the aforesaid writ petitions. It is further stated that Special Civil Application Nos.575 of 2010, 576 of 2010 and 577 of 2010 have been preferred before this Court, however, on account of pendency of the dispute before the revenue authority, the same were not entertained. The review of the order was also rejected. The averments in paragraph 2(G) of the said application are vague and do not give a clear picture about the applicants being party or having filed the review application. It is, then, stated that the applicants had submitted several applications/representations to various authorities by disputing the acquisition of the subject land owned by them. The averments in paragraph 2(H) are also vague. The reference has been made to the application/representation moved by the petitioner from time to time in various paragraphs of the application.
2. However, the fact remains that there is nothing on record nor there is any averment in the application that the applicants have any concern with the subject land. Even otherwise, in the writ petition, the challenge was to the orders passed by the Collector and the Special Secretary, Revenue Department, in the proceedings which were preferred by the writ petitioners therein.
3. On a query made by the Court, the learned counsel for the appellants admits that none of the appellants herein, i. e. the applicants in the Civil Application No.1 of 2022 were parties to the proceedings before the Collector or the Special Secretary, Revenue Department, which were challenged before the writ Court.
4. For the aforesaid, we do not find any infirmity in the judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge. The Appeal is
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/1059/2023 ORDER DATED: 05/09/2023
undefined
dismissed, being devoid of merits. The Civil Application for stay does not survive and the same is disposed of, accordingly.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
cmk
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!