SCA/6265/2002 1/5 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6265 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= MUKESH ANANDMAL BASANTANI - Petitioner(s) Versus THE COLLECTOR & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SHIRISH JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 12/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner has challenged an order dated 31.07.2001 passed by the Joint Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat. By the said order, the Secretary was pleased to set aside the order dated 06.03.1995 passed by Collector, Dang. 2. By an order dated 06.03.1995, Collector, Dang granted Plot No.22 at Saputara to the petitioner on lease on certain terms and conditions. From the order, it can be seen that the petitioner and other persons covered by the said order were SCA/6265/2002 2/5 JUDGMENT enjoying the possession of Plot elsewhere of 8x12 ft. on yearly lease basis on which they were carrying on their small businesses. The petitioner, it appears that he had put up his pan shop on the said plot allotted to him. When the plot holders applied for extension of the lease, Collector, Dang decided to shift them to another location where like the present petitioner, the other plot occupants were granted similar plot area of 3x5 feet. This was on certain terms and conditions. The allottees were to pay yearly rent of Rs.48/= and also pay certain deposit to the Government. 2.1 Joint Secretary found that the order of the Collector was not legal. He therefore after issuing show-cause notices to the petitioner and other allottees, set aside the order passed by the Collector by the impugned order dated 31.07.2001. In the said order it was observed inter-alia that if the plots were sold through auction, much higher price could have been fetched. 3. Learned Advocate, Mr. Shirish Joshi for the petitioner submitted that on the hope of being allotted another plot, the petitioner surrendered his possession of the plot previously alloted to him. The petitioner is a small businessman having a pan shop and surviving solely on the said income. He SCA/6265/2002 3/5 JUDGMENT submitted that the petitioner should not be deprived of his livelihood. 4. On the other hand, the Assistant Government Pleader, Ms. Manisha Shah opposed the petition and supported the order passed by the Joint Secretary. 5. Having heard the learned Advocates for both the parties, I find that the petitioner was given land on yearly lease prior to the Collector passing his order in the year 1995 allowing a smaller plot of 3x5 feet at a new location. By virtue of impugned order dated 31.07.2001 passed by the Joint Secretary, the petitioner was deprived of both the plots. 6. With the reasoning of the Joint Secretary, there cannot be any quarrel. However in the special facts of the case, I find that the petitioner was carrying on his small business of a pan shop on a plot alloted by the Government on a yearly lease basis. At the time of considering renewal of lease, the Collector allotted a smaller plot of 3x5 feet at another location. Some years thereafter the Joint Secretary cancelled the order of the Collector thereby evicting the petitioner from the new site also. SCA/6265/2002 4/5 JUDGMENT 7. Upon the request of the Court, Learned Asst. Government Pleader, Ms. Manisha Shah has enquired the present position. On the basis of a Panchnama drawn which is produced on record, she stated that the petitioner was divested of his possession of the new plot and today the entire plot is open and is in possession of the Government. 8. Considering all these aspects of the matter, I find that though the petitioner cannot insist on being alloted the plot at the same site on the same terms and conditions as the Collector had in his order dated 06.03.1995 granted, nevertheless, the Government should locate a suitable plot where the petitioner can put up his cabin for pan shop on the current reasonable rate of rent that the Collector may fix. 9. Under the circumstances, this petition is disposed of with the following directions :- (i) After putting the petitioner to notice, the Collector, Dang shall ear-mark a suitable place where the petitioner can put up his pan shop. Such small plot shall be allotted on lease at the presently prevailing rate of rent. This exercise shall be completed within four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Before so allotting the plot, it will be open for the Collector to verify that the SCA/6265/2002 5/5 JUDGMENT petitioner is not occupying either of the two previously alloted sites. 10.Rule made absolute to the above extent. No costs. (Akil Kureshi, J.) Caroline