AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.M.Chhaya, J
Heard Mr. N.K. Majmudar, learned advocate for the appellants, Mr. Meet Thakkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5 and Mr. K.V. Gadhia, learned advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4.
Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 28.10.2020 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.13391 of 2020, the original petitioners have preferred this Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.
Heard Mr. N.K. Majmudar, learned counsel for the appellants. He has vehemently submitted that though the appellants have already been evicted from the land occupied by them, their case may be considered for Housing Schemes floated by the Government.
3.1. Mr. Majmudar further contended that the project is already undertaken by the Government upon Survey No.237 and the appellants have already been evicted.
3.2. Though Mr. Majmudar contended on merits of the matter, no specific ground or contention has been raised by Mr. Majmudar except the fact that the appellants have no other alternative accommodation, they may be accommodated in the Aavas Yojna.
Learned counsels appearing for the respondents have opposed this Appeal and have contended that the appellants have already been removed even before the filing of the Petition and therefore, the appellants are not entitled for any relief, as prayed for.
No other and further submissions are made by the learned counsels for the respective parties.
The learned Single Judge has observed in paragraph No.4 in the oral order dated 28/10/2020 passed in Special Civil Application No.13391 of 2000 which reads as under:
"4. At the outset, it may be noted that the present petition lacks basic facts and particulars. There is nothing on record to suggest that each of the 45 petitioners is having their huts on the land in question i.e. land bearing Survey No.237. The petitioners have also not produced the earlier notices received by them and the notices impugned by them, except the notices issued to the two-three petitioners by the Additional Mamlatdar, Rajkot under Section 202 of the Code, calling upon them to vacate the illegal occupation on the land bearing Survey No.237, which is a Government waste land. Under the circumstances, the present petition deserves to be dismissed on the ground of being vague and on the ground of non-production of requisite documents to show their legal occupation. From the documents on record, more particularly the notices issued by the respondent authority to some of the petitioners, it clearly transpires that they have illegally occupied the Government land, for which the notices were issued earlier and finally under Section 202 of the Code. As such, the petitioners themselves have mentioned in the petition that they had received notices and some of the petitioners had also replied to the said notices. Though the said notices and replies are not on record, even if the said statements are accepted as true, the petitioners were given opportunity of hearing before issuing the final notices under Section 202 of the Code, and therefore, it could not be said that the petitioners were not given opportunity of hearing before evicting them from the illegal occupation of the land in question."
No better particulars have been brought on record in this appeal.
Mr. Majmudar has not been able to establish as to what right the appellant has on the Government waste land being Survey No.237. After following due process, the appellants have been removed, we do not find any error which warrants interference by this Court.
As far as submission of Mr. Majmudar, learned counsel for the appellant that their case may be considered in Aavas Yojna is concerned, the appellants have to apply and if they are eligible, their case can be considered for which no direction can be issued by this Court.
The Appeal therefore fails and is hereby dismissed. No costs. Connected Civil Applications also stand dismissed accordingly.