Bhaveshbhai Vinodbhai Ajmeri vs Vadodara Municipal Corporation & 1 Other(S)

Biren Vaishnav, J

1 Heard Mr.Japan Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner.

2 In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 10.08.2016.

3 It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is carrying on the business of screen printing on paper, PVC and doing the business of binding. The premises has been let out by the owner for such purposes. It is situated in Ramdwar ni Chali, Bhutdi Janpa, Sardar Bhuvan no Khancho, Vadodara.

4 It appears that the owner had no issue with the petitioner using his premises for carrying out such business. However, pursuant to some complaints made by one Ramchandra Govindbhai Chauhan, and by the residents of the vicinity, the Corporation issued notice to the petitioner dated 09.01.2016. Reading the notice would indicate that it is the stand of the Corporation that it endangers health of the residents of the vicinity.

5 In the earlier round, this Court on 11.04.2016, in Special Civil Application No. 4576 of 2016 passed the following order, which reads as under:

"4. Mr. Japan Dave, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that respondent-corporation after issuing Notice dated 09/01/2016 immediately applied the seal and closed the premises, wherein the petitioner was doing business of screen printing, which is not dangerous to life. He would submit that without hearing the petitioner, the seal has been applied and proceeding initiated u/s.376 of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act and, therefore, the seal applied by the authority is required to be removed.

Mr.Nilesh Pandya, learned advocate appearing for the respondent would submit that after receiving one complaint from the neighbour of the petitioner, the impugned action has been taken by the authority."

6 The petitioner, pursuant to the order approached the Corporation with an application on 16.05.2016, and thereafter, by the impugned order, the Corporation directed the petitioner to stop using the premises for its screen printing business.

7 Mr.Japan Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner, would rely on Section 376 of the Gujarat Provincial Municipality Corporation Act, r/w part 1 of the Appendix to the Act to submit that the premises can be prevented from its use provided the articles which are kept therein are dangerous such as dynamite blasting powder, glycerine etc., and hence Section 376 therefore is not applicable.

8 Mr.Nilesh Pandya, learned counsel for the respondent -Corporation would draw the attention of the Court to the affidavit filed by the Corporation and submit that action was taken as a result of the petitioner being found using printing machine for which ink is used which causes a serious health problem. It is on this count that the petitioner was directed to close down his business.

9 Apparently, on perusal of the papers, it would indicate that not only the residents had given no objection to the business being continued, however, it is also evident from the record that the petitioner has permission from the Vadodara Municipal Corporation and also a permission from the District Industries Center for carrying out activities like screen printing other than textiles.

10 Mr.Japan Dave, learned advocate for the petitioner, would state that the petitioner is carrying out printing on a small scale and it is evident from the Certificate that what is being carried out is screen printing on paper and the capacity per annum is 1,000.

11 Apparently, this would not pose health hazard to the residents of the vicinity. Accordingly, the impugned notice / order dated 10.08.2016 passed by the respondent No.2, Vadodara Municipal Corporation is hereby quashed and set aside. The petition is accordingly, allowed. Direct service is permitted.