Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 287 (GUJ)

Aawas Adhikar Manch Surat v. State of Gujarat

2016-02-08

JAYANT PATEL, VIPUL M.PANCHOLI

body2016
ORDER : Jayant Patel, J. The Petitioner, claiming to espouse the public cause, has prayed for the relief to issue appropriate writ to provide living space to each of the hutment dwellers of City Survey No. 438 Paiki, Patel Vadi No. 2, Lal Darwaja, Surat, under the Scheme of JNNURM and the interim relief is prayed to prohibit the respondents from evicting the said hutments over the subject land. 2. We have heard Mr. Bhushan Oza, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Prashant Desai, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 and Mr. Devnani, learned AGP for respondent No. 1. 3. We may record that on 23.12.2015 when we considered the matter for the first time, following order was passed: “This matter was mentioned yesterday and Mr. Bhushan Oza, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners was directed to give advance copy to the advocate who may normally appear for Surat Municipal Corporation and accordingly, it was served to Mr. Prashant Desai. Today, when the matter is further taken up, Mr. Prashant Desai, learned counsel for the respondent Corporation states that he has talked to the Municipal Commissioner and has conveyed that the petitioners may apply by filling in requisite form for alternative accommodation within one week, the same shall be processed within one week therefrom and the matter may be kept on the next date and the report shall be submitted to this Court about the alternative accommodation provided. Till the next date, the concerned hutments on whose behalf the present petition has been filed, shall not be removed. S. O to 11th January, 2016.” 4. Thereafter, affidavit-in-reply has been filed and the petitioner has filed counter affidavit to the said affidavit-in-reply. It appears from the reply to the counter affidavit that out of total 69 hutments, 56 hutments are already allotted alternative accommodation at Bhestan, whereas the left out persons are to be allotted alternative accommodation at Kosad. As per the petitioner, all should be allotted alternative accommodation at Kosad instead for some at Bhestan. 5. The learned counsel Mr. Desai appearing for respondent No. 2 - Corporation states that so far as the alternative accommodation at Kosad is concerned, the same are under-construction and completion of construction is likely to take some time. As per the petitioner, all should be allotted alternative accommodation at Kosad instead for some at Bhestan. 5. The learned counsel Mr. Desai appearing for respondent No. 2 - Corporation states that so far as the alternative accommodation at Kosad is concerned, the same are under-construction and completion of construction is likely to take some time. If all are desirous to have alternative accommodation at Kosad, those who are allotted at Bhestan will have to vacate and only after the construction is completed at Kosad the allotment can be made to all including 56 persons plus 14 persons. 6. As such, when the alternative accommodation is under-construction at Kosad, naturally the same at the most can be allotted but the occupation cannot be made. However, as and when the construction is over the occupation can be permitted. Till then, 56 persons who are already allotted alternative accommodation at Bhestan can be permitted to occupy at Bhestan by way of an interim arrangement. 7. Under the circumstances, the following directions: (1) Those hutments for which the present petition has been filed, 56 in number, who are already allotted alternative accommodation at Bhestan will be continued to occupy by way of an interim arrangement. However, the regular draw will be made for allotment of 69 alternative accommodations at Kosad. After the construction is over, all allottees will be permitted to occupy the alternative accommodation at Kosad and those 56 allottees of alternative accommodation at Bhestan will shift themselves to the respective alternative accommodation at Kosad as per the draw and they shall vacate the alternative accommodation at Bhestan. 8. In view of the aforesaid arrangement, we find that when the alternative accommodation is to be provided, that too at the place of choice of the petitioner, may be after some time, the grievance of the petitioner would no more survive. Hence, the petition shall stand disposed of accordingly. Interim relief vacated.