SCA/17016/2007 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17016 of 2007 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI ================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================= SONGADH MAHILA SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT THRO' & 2 - Respondent(s) ================================================= Appearance : MS SONAL D VYAS for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR UR BHATT AGP for Respondent(s) : 1 -3, ================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI Date : 30/01/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.SHAH) Heard Ms Sonal Vyas for the petitioner and Mr UR Bhatt, learned AGP for the respondents. 2. The petition challenges the notice dated 19.5.2007 of the Collector, Surat calling upon the petitioner, which is a cooperative society, to remove the encroachment and the unauthorised SCA/17016/2007 2/3 JUDGMENT construction made on the land alloted by the Collector by order dated 9.8.1993 for the purpose of constructing a godown for cottage industry. 3. The petitioner's case is that the petitioner-society has been established for encouraging adivasi women in different cottage industries and other activities to earn their livelihood, that since godown was required to be constructed for storing the products of the cottage industry, and that the construction is on the land allotted by the Collector and is in accordance with the building plans and that no encroachment is made, respondent No.2- Collector, Surat had granted the petitioner only land admeasuring 260 sq.mtrs. in village Songadh on 9.8.1993, subject to certain conditions. It is also the petitioner's case that the godown was constructed by the petitioner-Society after obtaining permission from the Songadh Nagar Panchayat and that the construction has been done in accordance with the sanctioned plans. It is submitted that certain disgruntled antisocial elements had made complaints against the petitioner-society about unauthorized construction and encroachment, which were false complaints. 4. After issuance of Rule, respondent No.3- City Survey Superintendent, Vyara has filed affidavit-in-reply wherein the following averments are made in paragraph 12 of the reply affidavit dated 16.8.2007 :- “12. I say and submit that as per the investigation made by City Survey Superintendent District, Vyara that there is no encroachment made by the petitioner and there are no shops. The petitioner has constructed godown for the purpose granted by respondent No.2 (Collector). As per the survey, constructed portion is 5.02 sq.mtrs. less than 260 sq.mtrs.” The report dated 30.5.2006 of the City Survey Superintendent, Songadh which is produced by the petitioner at SCA/17016/2007 3/3 JUDGMENT Annexure-F to the petition is also on the same lines. 5. In view of the above report as well as the affidavit of the City Survey Superintendent, Vyara, there can be no question of the petitioner having committed any encroachment or put up any unauthorized construction. We have, therefore, no hesitation in allowing this petition and quashing and setting aside the impugned notice dated 19.5.2007 of the Collector, Surat at Annexure-I to the petition. 6. In view of the fact that the petitioner-society is a cooperative society of Adivasi women engaged in running cottage industries and the petitioners have not made any encroachment nor have they put up any unauthorised construction, still respondent No.2 issued the impugned notice without considering the letter dated 30.5.2006 of the City Survey Superintendent, Songadh (Annexure-F), we are of the view that the respondents should be directed to bear costs of this petition. 7. The petition is accordingly allowed. The impugned notice dated 19.5.2007 of the Collector, Surat at Annexure-I to the petition is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute. We direct respondent No.2 to pay the petitioner-society costs of this petition which are quantified at Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand). The costs shall be paid to the petitioner-society within one month from the date of receipt of this judgment. (M.S. SHAH, J.) (RAVI R. TRIPATHI, J.) zgs/-