6 On 3 March 1998, Special Civil Application 6 No 1584 of 1998 was filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Gujarat seeking the following reliefs This Honble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent authorities to grant appropriate land at least 3000 sq.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SANJAY KUMAR Date 2019.08.16 3 The appellant claims to be engaged in the business of manufacturing 165034 IST Reason 1 SLP C No 24021 of 2013 2 Act of 1976 cement pipes through M s General Cement Pipe Company Limited 3 on land bearing Survey No 288/4 admeasuring 5160 sq m situated at village Chandlodia, Taluka City District, Ahmedabad.
The reliefs that were sought before the High Court were in the following terms This Honble Court would be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction and be pleased to quash and set aside the order passed by the State Government, dated 5th October, 1998 Annexure G and further be pleased to direct the respondents, their agents and servants to grant the application preferred by the petitioner under Section 20 of the Urban Land Ceiling Regulation Act, 1976 as prayed for.
situated at village Chandlodiya, Taluka City District Ahmedabad till pending hearing and final disposal of the application under Section 20 of the Act, pending before the Revenue Secretary or the status quo with regard to the possession of the said land may be maintained by the respondent authorities, till the admission, hearing and 4 Regular Civil Suit No 469 of 1990 5 Tribunal 6 SCA final disposal of this petition.
However, in a Letters Patent Appeal filed by the State, the Division Bench, by an order dated 3 August 2004, set aside the order dated 16 July 1999 and remitted the writ proceedings back to the Single Judge for fresh disposal.
On 20 July 1990, the order of the companypetent authority dated 26 August 1985 declaring the land as excess vacant land was challenged in an appeal under Section 33 before the Urban Land Tribunal 5.
5 According to the appellant, on 23 July 1990, the Company instituted a 3 Company suit4 before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedabad in which an order of status quo was granted on the same day.
Upon the enactment of the Act of 1976 on 12 September 1976, Form I under Section 6 1 was submitted on behalf of the Company, declaring that the land was leased from the original owners.
On 26 August 1985, the companypetent authority under Section 8 4 declared land admeasuring 4160 sq m as excess vacant land.
A numberice under Section 10 5 was issued on 6 March 1987.
On 7 July 2005, the Single Judge dismissed a Writ Petition filed by the appellant seeking to set aside an order of the State Government rejecting an application for exemption under Section 20 of the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act 1976 2.
8 By an order dated 16 July 1999, a Single Judge allowed the above SCA.
4 At this stage, on 19 July 1990, the appellant filed an application for exemption under Section 20.
On 26 November 1982, a draft statement under Section 8 1 was issued.
On 6 July 1990, the companypetent authority issued a numberice under Section 10 6 intimating that possession of the excess land would be taken over.
Village form No 7/12 companytained an entry for the years 1979 80 and 1980 81 to the effect that the land had been put to number agricultural use without permission.
A numberification under Section 10 1 was published on 31 January 1986.
This was followed by a numberification under Section 10 3 on 6 December 1986.
7 By an order dated 3 July 1998, the High Court disposed of the above SCA with a direction to the State Government to expeditiously decide the appellants application under Section 20.
The appellant claims leasehold rights in the land under a rent numbere dated 27 March 1975.
On 31 December 1990, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal on the ground that the delay of over four years had number been satisfactorily explained.
2 The appeal arises from a judgment and order dated 24 January 2013 of a Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat, affirming the dismissal of a Writ Petition by the Single Judge.
Upon remand, a Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the SCA by a judgment dated 7 July 2005.
On 17 September 1985, a final statement was issued under Section 9.
On 1 September 1992, an order was passed under Section 11 in the matter of companypensation.
The case of the appellant is that on 24 July 1990, possession of the excess land was purported to be taken over under a valid panchnama, inspite of the order of the Civil Court.
On 5 October 1998, the application under Section 20 was rejected in view of the fact that the land had vested in the State.
As a result, by virtue of the provisions of Section 2 q , the land upon which companystruction had been put up was liable to be companysidered as vacant land.
The respondent authorities may be restrained from taking possession of the land bearing Survey No.
Thereupon, the appellant filed another Writ Petition being SCA No 9057 of 1998 challenging the rejection of the application under Section 20.
288/4 admeasuring 5160 sq.
Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J 1 Leave granted1.
or any other appropriate measurement of land which this Honble Court deem fit and proper, to the petitioner firm so that the manufacturing activities may be carried on properly, on merits and in accordance with the provisions of the said Act.
of land of the petitioner, is excess vacant land, had become final and the petitioner had number challenged the same before any authority or Court.
