Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 1645 (GUJ)

Bhupendra Bhagubhai Patel v. State of Gujarat

2017-09-14

J.B.PARDIWALA

body2017
ORDER : J.B. PARDIWALA, J. 1. By this application under Article 227 of Constitution of India, the applicant calls in question the legality and validity of the order dated 13th June 2017 passed by the SSRD at Ahmedabad, by which the SSRD rejected the revision application filed by the applicant herein, thereby affirming the order of the Collector, Bharuch, dated 24th August 2016. 2. The SSRD, while rejecting the revision application, held as under: “The revision application of the applicant the oral & written submissions of the learned advocates, the supporting evidence as well as the impugned order passed by the Collector, Bharuch, are taken into consideration. The house no. 2228 situated opposite Chandranagar Society, Mouje Palej, Dungripal at Bharuch is running in the name of the brother of the applicant. The land admeasuring 46.95 sq.meters of Block No. 31 paiki 2, situated near a veterinary hospital adjacent to the house of the brother of the applicant, on being demanded by the applicant, the present authority, vide its order no. MVV/JMN/BHACH/6/2015 dated 22.9.2015, had directed the Collector, Bharuch, to sympathetically consider the case. In furtherance thereto, the Collector, Bharuch, had call for the report from the Taluka Development Officer which indicated that the land is a ‘gamtal’ land situated adjacent to the veterinary hospital, therefore, it may be used for the public purpose of Sub-Centre, Palej. Therefore, the Collector, Bharuch, vide his order no. CTS/Vashi/1467 dated 24.8.2016, stated that the said land is required for public purpose by the Taluka Panchayat. Therefore, it was ordered to file the application for regularizing the illegal encroachment and to voluntarily remove the encroachment. It seems to be proper and reasonable as per the provisions of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code. The Collector, Bharuch, after perusing the case and examining the revenue record, has passed a reasoned order. The impugned order passed by the Collector, after considering the provisions of the Land Revenue Code as well as the circulars, is legal and reasonable and, therefore, no interference is warranted.” 3. It appears from the findings recorded by the SSRD that the applicant herein requested the authorities concerned to allot a plot of land admeasuring 47 sq.meters which is adjacent to the house of the applicant herein. 4. It appears from the findings recorded by the SSRD that the applicant herein requested the authorities concerned to allot a plot of land admeasuring 47 sq.meters which is adjacent to the house of the applicant herein. 4. It appears that the residential house is owned by the brother of the applicant, but I am informed by the learned counsel that the applicant is jointly residing with his brother in the same house. In anticipation of such grant of 47 sq.meters of land, the applicant also put up construction on the same. This led to the proceedings for removal of the encroachment. 5. The applicant has lost upto the SSRD. No error, not to speak of any error of law, could be said to have been committed by the authorities in passing the impugned orders. No interference is warranted in exercise of my supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 6. The encroachment has got to be removed. 7. This application fails and is hereby rejected.