9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 744X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Commissioner of Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation is directed to consider the application for sanction within four weeks, the layout and building plans as per the current development control rules and pass order in accordance with law. 74. We also direct Respondents 1 and 2 to collect non- agricutural permission charges and conversion charges for the lands bearing Survey Nos. 470/1, 471/2, 471/3 and 472 situated at Village Vadva, Bhavnagar as prevalent in the year 1981. The petitioners sent a representation to the Government along with a copy of the aforementioned judgment with a request to comply with the directions contained in the judgment. The petitioners, thereafter sent several reminders to the respondents to comply with the said judgment. Notification was issued by the State Government wherein the lands of RS Nos. 471/2 and 472 were notified as a water body in purported compliance with the High Court's order dated 02.08.2002. By the said order, the High Court had directed the State Government to notify the water bodies in the territory of the State that vest in the State and/or the Area Development Authorities or the Local Bodies including the Panchayat in th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was written on 10.01.2007 to the Revenue Department by the Collector to take steps as the State Government has taken a decision to accept the judgment of this Court dated 15.10.2004 for land admeasuring 17 acres 4 guntas, 32 guntas and 1 acre 14 guntas upon which sundervas bungalow is located. However, to nullify the aforesaid acceptance of the judgment in respect of the land mentioned in survey Numbers above, permission for non-agricultural use has been given for the recreation use and not for the residential use thus depriving the petitioner of the right to construct residential building. We heard Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in the contempt petition and Mr. L.N. Rao, learned senior counsel for the respondents in contempt petition and the petitioners in IA No. 17 and 18 of 2005. At the time of hearing, our attention was drawn to the details of the earlier proceedings where the contention was that the land on survey Nos. 472 and 471/2 which form part of the lake/water body was taken by the State Government. Our attention was also drawn to the following documents: 1. Affidavit-in-reply dated 12.12.2001 filed by Shri Kantilal A Patel, former ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Hon'ble Apex Court dated 15.10.2004, the Revenue Department of the State Government vide letter dated 16.2.2005 at Reference No. 3 had accepted the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court for all the lands except for the land of RS No. 472 of Mauje Vadva. Thus, directions have been given to this office to initiate process for the land of all the survey numbers except for the area of S.No. 472 of Vadva. For initiating further process in connection with the letter dated 16.2.2005 of the Government, by the order at Reference No.5 whereby the Scheme was sanctioned for construction of dwelling units for weaker sections of the society for total 34,47,918 sq.mtrs. out of which about 80 acres of land of Acres 550 and 31 gunthas of RSN 471/2 is being shown as Water Body in the sanctioned development plan of the Bhavnagar Area Development Authority and as the land of S.No. 472 is to be kept pending for the present, except this lands as well as the land for which earlier non-agricultural permission has been granted, considering the land of acres 699-03 gunthas (2829020.5 sq. mtrs) forming part of ULC Scheme to be Deemed NA (land termed to be non-agricultural land) pursuant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng fit for cultivation was excluded from the purview of the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960. 3) The Right, Title Entry made in the revenue records in respect of the lands in question in the name of the appellant has become final and conclusive and, therefore, removal of the appellant from any of the Survey Numbers in question is not permissible. 4) The declaration issued by the competent authority and Additional Collector under the ULC Act, in exercise of the power under Section 21(1) of the ULC Act after verifying the title of the appellant in respect of the above survey numbers is final and conclusive. 5) The writ petition filed by the Bhavnagar Municipality for quashing and setting aside the order dated 6.12.1979 granting exemption to the lands and sanctioning the scheme under Section 21 of the ULC Act was valid and legal. 6) It is not in dispute that the appellants have raised construction on the lands and the lands have been fully developed, save and except, the lands in Survey No. 469/1. 7) The orders dated 9.11.1979 and 20.11.1979 whereby the Deputy Collector dropped the proceedings filed by the former Ruler under Section 8 of the ALC Act for a dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e between the Bhavnagar University and the appellant with reference to Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976. The appeal filed by the Bhavnagar University was finally dismissed by this Court. 15) Review petition No. 33 of 2003 was also dismissed by this Court. It is thus clear and apparent that despite the clear observations of this Court in paragraphs above of the present judgment that no issue raised in prior litigations can be raised again and no attempt to challenge the right and title in respect of the land in question could be made against the petitioners, namely, the respondents have once again sought to raise the same issues with a view to flout the directions of this Court and deprive the petitioners of the legitimate rights accruing to them from the judgment of this Court. The aforesaid attitude persists notwithstanding that the judgment of this Court has been passed in contempt proceedings and this Court has expressly observed that any further lapse shall be viewed extremely seriously. We have already elaborately dealt with the history of the present litigation between the parties which shows that despite the petitioners having succeeded before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disputing the statement of learned senior counsel for the State made a categorical statement that the said survey No. 471/2 is not a water body. The statement made by the learned senior counsel is placed on record. If it is not a water body, there cannot be any impediment on the part of the respondents' authorities in granting non- agricultural permission and other necessary building and development permission in respect of RS No. 471/2 admeasuring 80 acres and 472 admeasuring about 50 acres of village Vadva Dist. Bhavnagar. If 471/2 is the Water Body the respondents would be at liberty to decline Non Agriculture permission. We also direct the respondents to collect non- agricultural permission charges and conversion charges for the lands bearing survey Nos. 470/1, 471/2, 471/3 and 472 situated at village wadera Bhavnagar as prevalent in the year 1981. In our opinion, all the respondents had deliberately and with mala fide motive committed contempt of our order dated 15.10.2004. We have already explained their conduct and refusal to comply with our earlier orders. When they were advised to comply with the order by this Court during the pendency of the contempt proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
