Pankaj Kamlashankar Rai vs State Of Gujarat & 6 Other(S)

Aravind Kumar, CJ

Heard Mr.R.R.Marshall, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ applicant, Mr.K.M.Antani, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4 and 6 and Mr.Jal Unwalla, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.7. Notice to respondent No.5 stands dispensed with.

Petitioner has sought for a direction being issued to the respondents particularly respondent Nos.3 and 4 to initiate appropriate proceedings against respondent No.7 to demolish the construction put up by 7th respondent on land bearing Survey No.34/P7/4 situated at village Sarigam, Taluka Umargam, District Valsad contending same is illegal construrtion. During the pendency of the present proceedings, the jurisdictional Collector who had initiated proceedings against 7th respondent has passed an order on 30.01.2023 directing for demolition of unauthorized construction of Survey No.34/P7/4 (new Survey No.3006). The Taluka Development Officer has been directed to supervise the removal of unauthorized construction and has also been directed to levy fine at the rate of 40 times the N.A. assessment of the area as provided under Rules 100, 101 and 102 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Rules. Undisputedly, there is an appeal against said order which according to Mr.Unwalla, learned Senior Counsel appearing for 7th respondent intends to avail. It is needless to state that if there is a statutory remedy available, 7th respondent or any other aggrieved person would be at liberty to challenge the order dated 30.01.2023 passed by the Collector in the manner known to law.

Since we had directed the jurisdictional Talati to undertake the work of conducting inspection of the subject premises and report being filed vide order dated 3. 02.2023, learned Assistant Government Pleader has made available a copy of the communication dated Nil submitted to the learned Assistant Government Pleader by the Mamlatdar, Umargam, which discloses that though N.A. permission was granted with respect to the land in question on 10.08.2016 whereunder ground and two floors were permitted to an extent of 813.90 sq.mtrs. (vide Annexure-A dated 10.08.2016), additional floor has been constructed by 7th respondent. In fact, the permission which was granted was for only residential units namely ground floor admeasuring 109.14 sq.mtrs., first floor admeasuring 352.38 sq.mtrs. and second floor admeasuring 352.38 sq.mtrs. and in all 813.90 sq.mtrs. The photographs which has been produced along with writ compilation would disclose that a mammoth construction has been put up wherein not only additional floor has been construction but also 20 Flats have been constructed. In fact, two commercial shops have also been constructed under the very gaze of the jurisdictional Panchayat. This construction has been proceeded with illegally and it is this which per-forced the jurisdictional Collector to pass the order on 30.01.2023 for demolition. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would submit and undertake that said order would be taken to its logical end in the manner known to law. His submission and undertaking is placed on record.

In the meanwhile, 7th respondent is directed to intimate the occupants of the said building to deposit the rents which is being paid hitherto, which according to Mr.Unwalla, learned Senior Counsel appearing for 7th respondent is to the effect that in all 66 units and 2 shops rent would be deposited before the jurisdictional Collector. His submission and undertaking is placed on record. Till the statutory remedy available to 7th respondent is availed and same attains finality, this arrangement shall continue and it is needless to state that appellate authority would regulate the future deposit of payment of such rents or in other words, the appellate authority would be at liberty to pass appropriate orders in that regard. In the event of any of the occupants and/or 7th respondent failing to comply with these directions, the jurisdictional Collector would be at liberty to collect the amount from the persons in occupation of the said portions of the building. It is also needless to state that aforesaid observations are limited for the purpose of this petition only and appellate authority would be at liberty to examine the appeal in the manner known to law without being influenced by observations made hereinabove.

Subject to aforesaid observations, petition stands disposed of.