30-08-2024 - COURT OF HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, GUJARAT HIGH COURT

P mentioning supplementary number one and two daily Bo number 1 to six I'm taking time my Lord but that objection by say the top of the board M already heard last time last two times State take time to take instruction now my friend is requesting time if it can be kept on short as possible releas situation only only last chance my Lord next it will continue on the number 7 to 8 number 9 to 16 number 17 to 20 Cal number 17 yes here on behalf of Mr gang instruction to for a 2013 yes but there is a application of joining party there I word with senior advate Mr May request as this is is pertaining to Cooperative Society Cooperative act Mars may request for 9th so it can be proceeded on n9th Mars that can be I'm grateful 21 to 25 24 and 25 Min with concern I'm requesting for some time number 26 to 31 32 to 35 36 to 38 39 to 41 42 to 48 49 to 52 53 to 57 58 to 65 item 61 yes item 61 there is a CA one of 24 is a PR CA which has been notified with the main M leadership your notice is yet to be issued we are seeking direction to pay us wages for the past six months we have not been 61 request for some priority there a CA one of 24 list it will be it will be called out then when you want or you want the ca to be called out with the main matter 66 to 71 serial number 71 matter pertain to benefit of 1710 this is the second round and yet the government has not filed reply may be directed to at least file the reply F before the next okay number 72 to 79 itm 72 yes a very very short matter of course my personal interest but larger public interest also a person who has studied in marati medium was teaching in marati medium has been made principal of Gujarati medium school now how do I ask my teachers to teach how do I teach I don't know I mean I can speak guj but I have studied in marati medium throughout I was a teacher in marati medium okay and there are vacancies in marati medium with they filled up with teachers having Gujarati medium background follow I have my personal interest but it's a larger public interest of the students to will your Lordships take up at 3:30 or 4 whatever is convenient to your lordship not possible called out I'll take it but otherwise it's not because there are number of matters which are some dictations are there I I'll take exactly 300 seconds and sit down it takes time for the court Mr OA for you it is very easy or what is written in the petition may be taken as my arguments but we would like to I would like to hear you I would understand Mr O I'm priorities are not but by by any chance if not taken up at the earliest I I will be mind also that you have requested for priority if I'm not able to take up I will see to it that the matter is listed the way in which we can take it please and possibly not if it's convenient on next dat at the top of the board or something that I will try M no all that we expect is try only we can't be that will be done this not matters my friend will make a request at 5:00 if not taken please number 80 to 87 88 to 94 9th 90 9 yes H short okay 95 to 100 101 101 onwards if the numbers are here yes uh we'll be able to mention only up to 155 remainder of the board has gone to the other Cod there are about 25 30 matters any date may be fixed because this is that matter where we are on contract the entire institution is on contract right from MD to pun right yes and now we lord uh of course our court in government job has said that this is a fraud with the Constitution but now there are judgments of the Supreme Court which are very recent it says that you can't keep everything on adoc and uh contract true and what they used to do is initially we had GC which is a statutory body now same work they do it by way of government GI and gradually GC is being shut similar central government puts cisf under paramilitary and here gisf discharging the same duties under by way of a gr all right then any date we not this is not going to last two judgments of the Supreme Court cont State and and and of course parent parent would be state but uh all agencies or corporations or companies have their Council also miss we will fix it on a Thursday L have it on any Thursday I'll come and finish it second second half second half second second Thursday second Thursday would be matter on 12 19 and 26th we can fix 26th instead there of two weeks early this can be put an end to this but yesterday I fixed some matters if they I don't mind listing the matter if that matter goes on then that will have to be given precedence that is why I kept 26 because some matters are kept I'm told other matters are coming on 26th okay please serves the purpose 102 109 number 110 to 113 114 to 119 120 to 122 133 to 126 127 to 131 132 to 136 137 to 141 we will l number 142 to 146 serial number 140 okay sure the number 147 to 152 153 to 157 listing board permit early listing board matter is there is no date given in the matter after it was not real the same serial number one which I want to withdraw that P subject to the convenience of the Entre it may be listed on any m I not con C has been listed with the m matter under notice and Ur I was requesting so okay so then what we will do is because we I granted yesterday so there are some few fresh matters after once the last fresh matter is over I will take up the SE number one pass that I see pass over Lu so two or two in two petitions there will be a common order where there are individual yes and the Federation it will be a separate by way of present petition the petitioner hearing has the petitioners he have inv extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the both of you can take your seat pleas if I require any I for direction upon the respondent authorities to consider the applications of the petitions who have been serving in the CER of baile in various high court in they look in various honorable courts in the state of Gujarat and various District ports of Gujarat having their absolute administrative powers for framing the service conditions comma for modifying the service conditions and for taking appropriate decisions pertaining to the service of petitions and all such DEC decisions are within the absolute powers of the respond Authority as far as the appointment comma transfer comma disciplinary proceedings and other General General conditions of service pertaining to service of petitions including the powers of transfer power of interdistrict transfer power of mutual transfers of petitions who are serving in various subordinate courts of various districts of state of which in VAR the petitioners heing pursu to onetime settlement scheme with with respect to inter District transport transfer oh subordinate judicial sta class three and four in the state of Gujarat later 12 92 you produc applied under the safe schem an exure B page 12 an exture C page 28 it was in continuation with to the communication dated 12922 1692 applied under the same skin out of 13 2 three applicants uh petition applications seeking the for transfer came to be filed being agreed by the forces the petition approach this seeking the following wordss page 190 paragraph 8 Mr majud Mr MK majud The Advocate appearing for the r submits that the impune action undertaken by the respond of is in violation of the Cardinal principles of natural Justice next no detailed reasons have been mentioned for not considering SL rejecting the applications for inter District transfer and therefore the fored has resulted in the heartb burning amongst the petitioners whose names are mentioned at annexure 8 because many other beliefs who had preferred their respective applications among along with the petitioners way back in the year 2022 came to be considered and the inter District came to be allowed and without their being any reasons the applications of 524 candidates initially as per the resolution number 14943 65g came to be allowed no reasons that assigned for re rejecting the petitioner applications therefore the same is a non-speaking decision and no separate orders are con and no reasons are assigned for rejection of application of the inter distri transfer water petitions whose details are at an extra a placing Reliance on the foret submission it is submitted the prayers as prayed for be granted Mr Joi will learn senior counciling with Mr IG IG J the learned heing for the respond of submitted this the for8 scheme which is introduced by The respondent Authority is a one was a one sign scheme which was very which was benevolent in nature and benevolent in nature to facilitate the to facilitate such employees who who fell within the purview of the interd district transfer scheme it is submitted that it is a one time it was a onetime measure which is also known to the petitions post submitted that the communication which is subject which is duly produced the list which is the list dated 19324 very the applications stand fine it is stated that while the while the S applications came to be filed the bar provided in Clause 231 of the scheme of inter District transfer of subordinate judicial staff class three and four in the state of Gujarat shall not be applicable to all those above all those applicants and that they shall have a liberty to file a fresh application provided that they fall within the Amit of the existing of the S scheme the foret communication was was asked to be it was informed that the sa communication be intimated to the respective employees working under the establishment of the respective uh the respective subordinate courts that is the foret was communicated to the principal judge rapper M naria and dapur Bing Reliance on the for it is submitted that the submitted that there is no provision of review transfer application in the s SCH and in VI the prayers as prayed for are such that the same cannot be may not be considered P St upon instructions Mr Ji has placed on Rec a communication 24724 very why the petitioners of both the petitions it is upon instructions upon written instructions it is stated that the petitioners May apply a fresh for interd district transfer if they wish to apply and fall within the criteria of the scheme such inter District applications are to be placed before the inter District transfer committee once in a year in the month of March and it is solely upon the discretion of the committee to consider transfer applications in light of the scheme for the interdistrict transfer of subordinate judicial staff class three and four in the state of Gujarat line Legend after deliberation the committee in its report data 12323 ordered to file transfer applications of the petitioners along with other employees with Liberty to move a fresh application provided that they fall within the Ambit of the interd district placing reli theate submissions it is submitted that the TR that there is no IND indivisible right in the favor of petitioners for transfer submitted that it is it is within the domain of the employer to consider whether an employee is required to be transferred or not placing Reliance on the off it is submitted that no interference is all for in the decision that is taken by the respondent authority where comma wherein the applications of the applications D applications of the employees figuring an exture F stands file is submitted that considering it is in rejoin Mr majud reiterated the contentions raised earlier and also relied on 20103 732 20185 711 and 1994 5 minut placing Reliance on the for position of of for it is submitted that the communication dated 19324 whereby the applications of such employes is seeking interd District transfer St student F pursu to the schemes dated 12922 and 16922 the a fored is violative principles of natural Justice that reasons are required to be assigned and the petitioners were individually required to be informed in light of the it is submitted that the are PR forly allow applications page 23 they applied pursu the scheme which was a one time scheme floated on the same details are really produced at an extra and their applications came to be filed having heard the Learned Advocates of hearing for the respective parties it emerges that the respondent hearing introduced one time the respond hearing on 12922 upon directions by honorable the Chief Justice informed all the employees working on in respective establishments eligible for inter District transfer as per into inverted com scheme for interdistrict transfer of subordinate judicial CL class staff class three and four in the state of Filan inverted comma Z and who wish to seek inter District transfer on another district court or Court May apply with necessary documents for inter District transer it is opposite to refer to the S communication 12922 there was a clarification issued by the respondent hearing on 16922 that the foret was a onetime measure for inter District transport it respective of Eligibility criteria mentioned in the scheme for inter District transfer subordinate staff class three and four in the state of BU the applications the the employees included in the list duly produced at an extra de dated 14 to 23 were those who are included in the sa scheme that wherein the the application itions were granted under the SE scheme the petitioners hearing for a part of the of those employes whose applications came to be filed it is the grievance of the petitions that the foret is violative of principles of natural Justice that no reasons are assigned while filing their itions applications and that the orders are also not supplied or communicated to the petitioners individually on perusal of the list which is produced on record ature f page 57 the extra which is dated 19324 the respondent hearing informed the stakeholders to communicate the same to the concerned employee working under the same employee and establishment under the ination of the respondent hearing which reads thiss page 115 1150 P upon perusal of the S communication it is informed that while the application stand fin there would not be any bar under Clause 23 1 of the scheme of inter District transfer of subordinate judicial class staff class three and four in the state of Gujarat shall not be applicable the S up applicants and that it would be open for them to file a fresh application if they fall within the Ambit of the safe schem St in light of theate considering the contentions raised by the Learned Advocates councils appearing for the respective parties it is it to refer to the position of here you have 2022 Supreme Court 149 very e 40 23 and 40 43 53 53 ch 1995 supplementary four S 169 page one better is 2004 11 SEC 42 Paran 20041 C 42 8 parice 2022 considering the foros of the It is Well settled that transfer is an incident of service and is not to be interfer with by the force unless the S are held to be arbitrary Mala or infraction of any possessed Norm or principles covering the trans poer further if the transfers are affected revised or reconsidered at the instance of the employee the employee would not be in a position to function and the seed employee would continue in such place or position as the employee employee desires St theable aex coding as referred to above in 2022 12 2022 Supreme Court 1492 in case of Asad versus un of has set out the principles where is it is held that the power of judicial review cannot be exercised to interfere with a policy decision good Stu it is for the employer who execute the policy considering the interest of the establishment further having the the citations the position of law very Mr majmudar has placed 2010 3 732 in the opinion of this book is not applicable to the facts of the present Cas very in the S case the in the S case there was an opinion of the expert committee with respect to the expansion of a wherein it was held that the high court failed to consider the museum activities to be expanded by the appon in the S case which would adversely affect the monument and while taking decisions the high court failed to take into consideration the recommendation of the expert committee for allowing construction nor the reasons were recorded for rejecting the application for modification stuff in the facts of the present case the petitioners are the petitioners are not considered for transfer stop and their applications are filed with a liberty to apply a fresh without the bar of rule 231 2008 15 SEC 711 state of Rajasthan versus rajendra wherein it is held that the reasons are the heartbeat of every conclusion and without sing it becomes lightess stop in the facts of the present cas the petitioners more than 500 employees applications are filed po stop and it is always it is kept open for them to file a fresh po stop it is communicated to the subordinate courts to inform the petitioners that such applications are filed and the Liberty is reserved to apply a fresh full St in case of n in 1990 4 sec 594 it is the it in it was a case where with respect to a court Marshal with in the Army very it was held that principles of natural Justice were required to be followed even in for and reasons were required to be recorded in administrative decisions also in the facts of the present case the the in the facts of the present case this is a onetime scheme which is floated by the respondent authority to facilitate the option of transfer of those employe inter District transfer as a one-time measure to for the as a onetime measure Mr some of the candidates came to be the applications came to be considered whereas some applications came to be filed it is also kept open for those employees whose applications are F to apply a French if they fall within the Ambit of the existing scheme the foret is also placed on record by Mr communication issued by the respondent is placed on record by m the Learned senior Council Mr Ji upon instructions and it is also opposite to produce the scene I'm producing [Music] in light of the for in the open of this in absence of any policy to review a decision or in absence of any rules where the S decision can be reviewed or reconsidered this court doesn't this court is not inclined to exercise extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution of India for the for thetion there are two petitions so it will be a common order 918 and 9 in the second petition the facts are common in both the petitions or uh the SEC third petition that is 90 905 that is by the Federation that is by the Federation yes by way of present petition 905 the present petition is filed by is instituted by the petitioner Federation who are serving as assistants in various highboards in various District in various like on various courts in various districts State very the petitioner is a federation the petitioner that is the Gujarat State Judicial Department class the employees Federation is an association of federation registered by the high court of Gujarat wide resolution number B-1 1437 d71 on 12th July 2021 the Federation represents its members who are serving in class three Cada in various courts in the state of Gujarat and is represented by authorized signator who is authorized signatory the petitioner hearing P prayers of s has prayed for the following reliefs page 246 the the same resolution of referring the petition before this for for the grievance has raised in the present quation is duly produced on record Mr Ji that resolution Tav is on record at page it is uh 77 no no no in the second matter at page uh 28 after page 28 see the submissions respectfully would remain the same apart from the resolution resolution is you are right but Mr Ji had submitted that in absence of resolution it is also marked as Authority letter not numbered that is why perhaps it's not no but it is a resolution it is also marked of 12th page number is not there and page number is not we would have missed it true so therefore that that contention would not the instance of the Federation the facts are stated in the in the earlier petitions are the same same and therefore they are not repeated full St and the present petition is is also F seeking the same reliefs well while there is no change in the prayers as prayed for in the earlier petitions and the present petition the order that is passed in the earlier petition would govern the present petition also however in the facts of the present case the Mr josi the Learned senior Council upon instructions I submitted that the instructions which were produced on record in the SC so and so and so and so would not govern the president petition in light of the fact that while the petition is filed through the Federation each and every employee would be governed by separate conditions of service and in view thereof it is not possible and in view thereof such VI the fored instructions would not govern the present petition in light of the opposite no interference is called for for the prayers as prayed for in the present petition the reasons assigned in the earlier petitions would govern the present peti please any first phase matter will be taken there after top of the board matters number n is of 333 days notice other side Mr is appearing he have no my Lord cond the delay without recording statement there is a delay in bringing ha how many days Lord there is a Del of 33 days 333 days my what has happened application has been preferred by the a myot but there is a Meer objection therefore it was dismissed for default therefore lordship I file MCA and there is a delay of 330 days in MCA then what is the status of the sca not it is pending and it is going on myot it is coming before myot on ear earli before two days my now it is at on in month of so then cond please in filing the restoration application please restoration application in C yes yes number main matter is already pending huh number 11 next yes M okay let him be here number 12 this pertains to Grant of regularization to part-time employees in similar matter your leadership have issued notice notice returnable when are those matters coming up coming on third October for respond number one my for one and for Okay order I the bank order imp of the learn Dr Mumbai I me just give a brief facts on 9123 learned Dr dismiss the appeal of the borrower on the ground of delay 241 2023 the same they prefer Lear Dr 7th March 24 auction takes place on symbolic position the property is sold on 7th May 2024 the order which your office will find on page 83 yes is a conditional order by the Lear Dr granting stay in the favor of the borrower according to me there are not sufficient reasons recorded because Lo are well aware the section 18 the predeposit is of 50% in order to reduce 50% to a lesser amount learned D is obliged to give reasons to be recorded in writing is my case is not recorded So happily word it that as it may on 28th May the very same month despite the order of 7th May the borrower fails to make the predeposit so 28th May order is there which your losses will find on page 87 yes by virtue of which the appeal stands dismissed on page 87 because the condition of free deposit has video order dat 7th May is not comped correct now my case starts from here the borrow did not move for extension of time also corre he could have moved for extension of time before to learn a Dr for so and so reasons though order was passed on 7 may I could not deposit the B does not does so on 12th June the notice is issued by the concern Authority Under section 14 to take physical position on 30th June laes will remember that the O has already taken place yes now when on 12th June the notice is ised which your will find on page 88 and the date to take physical person is depicted on page 88 as 38 June yes so on 20th June the borrower moves to the Dr by filing an application for restoration of the appeal and undertakes to make the payment that payment is also made there is no issue on the aspect of payment but the issue is the Imp order is on page 12 the core question for the consideration of The Honorable court is when the appeal is dismissed for non-compliance and not for non prosecution I can understand yes if he had not appeared he could have restored it correct kindly appreciate the timeline the borrower sits over the matter 7th May the condition order is passed 28th May the appeal is dismissed he has not moved to the Dr for extension of time and when POS notice is issued on 12th June thereafter he files an application for restoration which the Le de restos on 20th June so my notice to take place on 30th June is frustrated correct and for which time was given for one month or so he eventually ends up getting six months time so for some time the borrower can app the entire Mischief borrower does not move the V on time does not file an application for seeking access of time also and when the notice is issued at the and moves to the DI and what otherwise the D would have given one month or two months time for payment he ends up getting more time correct so the question for loses consideration is on page 12 page 12 and the relevant portion starts from para 4 onwards which theable court will find on page 14 whether the Learned Dr has the power to restore the appeal which is dismissed for non- compliance I can quite see my L is dism for non prosecution the learn negatives the arent of the bank and says ultimately whether it's non prosecution or non- compliance what are the same things but kindly appreciate the effect of by while restoring the what is the direction so the order of 7th May is restored huh appeal is restored back to the original file 7th May order will revive they just stay order against me 7th May order May order your losses will find on page 83 then that the conditional order and state conditional deposit order page in a moment 7th May 83 it starts from page 83 the relevance for The Honorable code will be page 86 when he was directed to make the P make the payment so then he has made the payment earlier not but now he has now he has made the payment then how was that payment accepted if there was no appeal before that canly see page6 I see because there was no appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution or for non-compliance of the directions please once it was dismissed it was not on the file file of the learning Dr now if it was not on the file of the Dr then the could not have accepted the payment no it would not number of times unless it is on the file once I restore a petition only then it would be reflected for that purpose honorable kindly go to page 15 my lord5 yes and it starts from page 14 bottom my lords page 14 bottom the Imp order in the instant case par five page 14 in the instant case the app were directed to deposit the some of rupes 35 LHS as predeposit for entertaining the appeal he essentially paid only some of 5 lakhs and the balance sum of 30 lakhs was directed to be deposited in cres which he defaulted and therefore as per the order order the appeals to dismiss for default of non-compliance now with this application the appellant are depositing the entire amount so he comes on 20th June just two days prior and says I'm making the payment so what he has not gained by 7th May order by this Mischief I POS a question to myself whether that's why lar can restore it back so for non-compliance corre otherwise every borrow will sit at the fence and when will isue the notice then only we'll go and then we'll take the advantage of 6 months8 months time there is there would the statute provides any time section 18 for the Moment by section 18 the statute says at the time of appeal he has to make the payment section 18 second unnumbered provisor second unnumbered provisor appended to section 18 runs th provided further that no appeal shall be entertained unless the borrower is deposited with the app tribunal 50% of the amount of Deb due from him as claimed by the secal creditors or determined by the DRT whichever is less and then the third unnum Proviso provided also that the app May for the reasons to be recorded in writing reduce the amount to not less than 25% of date referred to in the second provisor so legally D cannot entertain the appeal but procedurally what happens is when I file an appeal I move an application of wer I keep that application of w also pending for months together when the bank issues notice I go to the Dr and kindly pass the order of reducing the amount correct and if he's able to successfully pursu the authorities not to take the position he will allow the order to also live his own life and then when the second notice comes like this in this case then he will go over the process entirely circumventing the public money Rec they kindly appreciate my predic property sold in March 2024 I have to give to the purchaser today who is the worst affected is the purchaser not the bank bank has pocketed the money he get a stay order heard Mr vishwas Kish the learn advate of heing the applicant by of present petition the petitioner hearing is agreed by the order imped passed in miscellaneous appeal it would be M 59 of 24 Restoration in miscellaneous appeal 28 of 24 disposed of stop it is submitted that respond hearing approached the Le Dr challenging the order passed by the in this what is the number of the essay before the DRT Dr DRT must be number is in a moment is in a moment 58 upon filing of such appe 50 or 23 mil 51 of 20 DRT number yes you refer to that order first order fifth DRT dr8 dr8 7th May that your find P 83 8 the conditional order directing payment and state page 83 page 83 by 7th May 2024 which is duly produced at page 83 upon issue and so notice upon yeah ing the respective parties the Learned Dr in paragraph 9 directed The response original AB balance to deposit a sum of rupees 35 lakhs as pre- deposit for entertaining the appeal upon a statement made by the Learned Council oping for the pellums a sum of Rupees is that a sum of rupes 5 black was transferred to the Dr Mumbai and in view there the remaining amount was directed to be deposited in two installments which read those page 86 per upon deposition of such amount it was the held that the surface action shall stand stall till the next returnable date St the respondent hearing failed to comply with the forid order INRI order passed by the learner dr8 dated 7524 as referred above failing to make the pre- deposit and view thereof the appeals to dismissed page 87 the interlocutory applications also were dismissed as infructuous Mr Shah the Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits subsequent that to the petitioner hearing issued an notice the learn CM you should not notice you must have preferred for purging the petitioner preferred CM 567 26 of 23 whereing notice came to be issued for symbolic possession is taken that is on page 19 my lords page 19 then this this notice dated 12624 is for physical position physical position section 14 order taking physical position pursu to the order passed under section 14 on 3623 duly produced at page 88 they submitted that in the meantime the respondent approached the Dr by preferring Ana prefering the impune preferring application beings ma 59 of 24 for Restoration in melus up 24 of 24 which was disposed of which claim to be restored by order dated 28 624 accepting the amount of rupees 2850 lakhs deposited by the respondent to Deandra and 150 lakhs being transferred by rtgs the holding that the interest of Justice requires opportunity to be granted to the appellants with a cost of rupes 25,000 delayed payment upon such order have having been passed the appeals to restor as also the interlocutory orders to restored the Resto Mr sha the Learned Advocate appearing for thec placing Reliance on the appro submit the said the respondent hearing failed to comply with the order dated 7522 consequent comma consequently by order dated 8524 the appeal stood dismissed as having dismissed and the interlocutory applications also stood dismissed them infructuous in the meantime a possession notice came to be issued on 1262 for physical not take physical possession on 3624 upon order issued under section 14 of the act by the order passed under section 14 of the by the CMM Raj to over the process of law the respondent hearing after the issuance of s notice F the application being 59 of 24 for restoration and in view there the appeal having been restored and the ENT moders having been restored the order dated 7524 comes into force and the action undertaken by the petitioner hearing subsequent to the S appeal having been dismissed as being infructuous and interl applications having been dismissed as infructuous stands revived and the action undertaken by the respondent bank is over by such upon filing of such application and up by the order inun passed by the Learned Dr the foret contentions submissions made by Mr sha the Learned Advocate Prima require consideration in view there issue notice making it returnable so in the meantime the impune order passed by the s is to remain stay till the next date after four weeks after two weeks two weeks okay 14 number 15 yes under the multi-state cor socities act attachment B is affixed VES will find the board of attachment on page 10 the case of the Liquidator is that I have taken the loans from the society and defaulted so on page 10 is the board effect on my property by the Learned Liquidator of the other tradit Cooper Society limited my case is there is no rec proceedings under 84 whatsoever against me the attachment order is also not soed upon me so pursu and there to and your will appreciate on page 12 is the sale deed my sale Deed by which I'm holding the property is of 152 2006 from 2006 onwards there are no proceedings of recovery by the Society of course it's the case of the Liquidator that I happen to be a distant relative of the promoter and the promoter committed irregularities right now the promoter is the bus so your loses will appreciate on page 29 yeah I moved the objections before the Lear Liquidator by email as well as rpad that I I'm not been served with the copy of the attachment order and there are no proceedings whatsoever against me yes so kindly provide the copy of the attachment order and on what basis you are attaching the property because my basically my case is that even if there is a loan which they have to recover your are well aware under the scheme of 84 the society has to file arbitration case before the Learned arbitrator and then only they can attach the property so my representation objections on page 29 have gone unanswered by the Learned Liquidator I'm before your La is only praying for notice let them come and answer to yours okay that can be done Lear issue not making it returnable service your sure right number 61 appliation for we've been working as part time of my but since March 2024 they have not they are not paying us any wages now what they're trying to do is they're asking me to work through an Outsourcing agency which is against the order passed by this honorable court so what happened was in the year 2006 and 2012 they passed a government resolution for outsourcing the the services of part- timers against which some part-timers approached this court court and the Court held that Outsourcing policy is bad in law all right which is why the gr of 16 2019 came into place Min giving minimum but you are prayed that the wages of from March 20124 that is the limited why right now in the Civil application that is what they not paying the wages they are saying that we will give you we will start paying you if you start working through an Outsourcing so if I accept work through Outsourcing my prayers for regularization my prayer for minimum wages everything then if you don't work we are working we are working they taking work from us but they want to pay us through an Outsourcing agents so while you are working you are not uh you are not accepting the payment that is made by them no no it is not that we are not accepting we are not accepting working through and Outsourcing I follow your B all right you take instructions huh Mr Muna I'm sure let notice be heard Miss STI the Learned Advocate appearing for that isue notice making it returnable on next Friday a copy of the notice issue okay and the main matter will also go on next number this Mr call Mr ra the serial after second in the second half I dictation no but for me I'm yes Mr yes but on the last hearing I had pointed out factual details correct I may very shortly summarize those details yes Surat Municipal Corporation had granted lease to the respondent society on 18th of April 1968 for a period of 50 years yes that lease came to an end on 17th of April 2018 therefore the society textile Cooperative societies moved the application before Surat Municipal Corporation for renewal of Le and stated that whatever amount you fix it would be acceptable with some negotiation so there is mot we are the members the corporation has mot increase the prices of the lease amount so disproportionately Mal which is M according to the petitioners it is M contrary to the settle principles of and the details of the same if your lots are pleased to consider they are initially malot total land area is 18,41 square met and annual rent of the land was 38852 now my lords according to our calculations my lords May kindly see what is the effect of and whether it would be open to a whether it will be open to a public body like Municipal Corporation to charge this amount your L May kindly see M this is the table which I have prepared there are three lease dates of the Year 1968 at the that is 18th April 1968 5th of November 1969 23rd of July 1970 these M total area is my Lord 24435 and total amount annually is 51313 PES so Municipal Corporation was charging 51,000 from textile Society every year for this 24435 square meter now my Lord what is the new uh new Arrangement rent amount for one year it was previously 24435 so that is maintained then pre premium is taken at the jentri price which comes to malot 12 89 uh 1 28 lakh 96,2 rupees so what was my Lord previously 51,3 rupees it is now Mal 1 28 lakh 96,2 rupees for the same area per an for the same area yes cor so it is this small and this amount P which is fixed by Surat Municipal Corporation is approved by the state government and this liability comes upon the members because my Lord members who were otherwise paying my Lord at the rate of 51313 now my Lord are asked to contribute one 29 lakh 2,685 every year for 10 years mot yes yes I follow so this is malot so you are agreed by the new agreement agree by new agreement this these are the factual details Lord for which my Lord on previous occasion I had brought your lordship's kind attention that this is not open to a local body body which is not to charge such exor amount of lease from the parties so this is M the issue which is subject matter of challenge in this repetion followed m Lord in support of my submissions M Lord that this is not at all permissible at the end of the Surat Municipal Corporation and by the confirmation by the state government my submission which I had M Lord on the last occasion briefly pointed out M Lord I would just again summarize it Lord what is done this time is the base of jentry price is taken for the purpose of determination of renewal of lease that is contrary to the settle principle of law what has been done is take the case mot that in this area jentry price is 10,000 rupees per square meter so 10,000 is taken based for the purpose of determination of malot the lease amount it is not a sell it is not a sell transaction even thenot 10,000 rupees is taken for the purpose of determining the lease amount yes so the very principle applied what the purpose of determination of the Le amount itself isot contrary to setal principle of I had further pointed out Lord that under the rent act Lord rent Act is between the private landlord and the Tenant to the state government and Municipal Corporation these land laws regulations do not apply rent does not apply so I do not bring malot that it Municipal Corporation is the landlord Municipal Corporation is the less or the respondent society is the Lessing but if it would have been owned by a private party and it would have been governed under rent act maximum permissible increase in rental amount is 4% every year so a private person who leses out his property for the purpose of earning for the purpose of profit or for the purpose of return better return of his property who lets out the property my Lord if he has given M Lord a premises on lease by way of rent to the tenant and say for month every month he's required to pay rupes 100 next year my Lord maximum amount of Rise which the landlord can have is 4% so next year M he can have 104 rupees increase the one who is letting out the premises for the purpose of profit or for a better return from his property here the state government namely Municipal Corporation a Public Authority Under article 12 has defied all all the Notions and all the established Norms with respect to the lease amount I had further submitted to your laips that concept of Premium is alien to the fixation of these amount because my Lord it is not that the land is being sold to the party the right to occupy is given to the society and not mot the permanent ownership rights and here is a case M Lord where before 50 years Municipal Corporation had given Baron land to the textile Society only land was given then this Society M creating the funds from its own resources has built up a shopping center which was which is considered to be one of the finest uh trading center in city of su now it has M its value has been increased considerably and M Lord as far as trading place is concerned textile Market of Surat occupies a special place but that isot the act of the society not of Surat Municipal corporations it is the society who built up the shopping mall mot shopping centers mot shops the Traders have come and they have made a big name of this textile Society textile Market as far as corpor option is concerned it contribution is nothing Beyond Grant of the land so if that is the case M such a charging of the amount which is now ultimately the burden is like a tax burden is on the taxpayers same those Society has agreed the burden is upon the members like the petitioners therefore they are agreeed correct my further submission to a lordship is mord that there is a post office mord in the area where the rental increase is not that way I have pointed out those figures of post office case and here Lord such a astronomical amount is determined The Honorable Supreme Court head malot considered the aspect about the charging of the amount when the state or state Authority is the owner of the land or the building and my Lord where the underlying principle is that state or state authorities is not a private landlord who should engage itself into profit earing or charging of high amount and its decision should be packed by reasons in support of my submissions I propose to site couple of judgments to youres First in point of time is dadas maras case orted in 1989 3 SEC page 293 I would uh humbly and respectfully urge your LS to see paragraph 16 on page 303 our attention was also drawn by Mr chinai learned counil for the appellant to the observations in administrative law by which fifth edition at page 355 it was stated therein as follows statutory power conferred for public purposes is conferred as it were upon trust not absolutely that is to say it can validly be used only in the right and proper way which Parliament when conferring it is presumed to have intended then my lords May kindly turn to paragraph 23 next page mod page 304 yes the contractual privileges are made immune from the protection of the rent act for the respondent because of the public position occupied by The respondent Authority hence its actions are amable to judicial review only to the extent that state must act validly for a designable reason not whimsically for any ulterior purpose where any special right or privilege is granted to any public or statutory body on the presumption that it must act in certain manner such bodies must make good such presumption while acting by virtue of such privileges judicial review to oversee if bodies are so acting is permissible then my lords May kindly turn to paragraph 27 on page 306 we are inclined to accept the submission that every activity of a Public Authority especially in the background of the Assumption on which such Authority enjoys immunity from the Rus of the rented must be informed by reason and guided by by the public interest all exercise of discretion or power by public authorities as the respondent in respect of dealing with tenants in respect of which they have been treated separately and distinctly from other landlords on the assumption that they would not act as private landlords must be judged by that standard if a government policy or action even in contractual matters fails to satisfy the test of reasonableness it would be uncons stitutions then Lord honorable Supreme Court has referred to certain judgments this was a case Lord where Bombay for TR act has redetermined the lease charges and the lease holders were agreed by the very high rise made by Bombay public trust with respect to those lands and premises that was a case which had gone to the honorable Supreme Court and honorable Supreme Court in those facts my have made these observation say that public bodies they do not are they are not subject to the provisions of L rent act yes therefore they must act with reasonable reasonable man pleas Lord I propose to rely upon another judgment Lord 20043 Supreme Court cases page 214 this also arose from Bombay malod with respect to the provisions uh with respect to the properties of Bombay Port first the L malot referred to dwarkadas Marfa which I just now read yes in paragraph 14 yes but I would respectfully urge your LS to see paragraph 16 to paragraph 19 paragraph 16 starts at from page 235 the position of law is settled that the state and its authorities including instrumentalities of the state have to be just fair and reasonable in all their activities including those in the field of contracts even while playing the role of a landlord or tenant the state and its authorities remain so and cannot be heard or seen causing displeasure or discomfort to article 14 of the Constitution of India it is common knowledge that several rent control legislation exist spread around the country the emergence whereof was witnessed by post World War scarcity of accommodation often these legislations exempt from their applicability the properties owned by the government semi-government or public bodies government on corporations trust and other instrumentalities of the state what is the purpose do the legislature intend to leave such entities absolutely unbridled and uncontrolled as landlords from the operation of the rent control legislation or do they do so with some hope and trust in such institution in dadas Marfa and Sons a few decisions and authorities were cited before this call the observation of Chief Justice chaga as His Lordships then was in Ram prad J versus Dominion of India where with approval stating that while enacting rent control legislation the government seeks to achieve the object of protecting the tenants and preventing the rent from being increased and people from being ejected unreasonably then it cannot be assumed that the very government would itself be indulging in those very activities which it was proposing to prevent by enacting such laws the underlying assumption behind granting exemption from the operation of the rent control legislation was that the government would not increase rents and would not eject tenants unless it was necessary to do so in public interest and a particular building was required for the public purpose it was also pointed out that the government or local Authority or the board would not be actuated by any profit making motive so as to unduly enhance the rents or eject the tenants from their respective properties as private landlords or are like lik ly to be this court in babur ra Mo versus Bombay housing board recognized that the basis of differentiation in favor of public authorities like Bombay Port trust was on the ground that they would not act for their own purpose as private landlords do but would act for public purposes the cult held in dardas Marfa that the public authorities will enjoy the benefits without being hidebound by the requirements of the rent act must act for public benefit where they fail to do so they render themselves as amenable to adjudication under civil review jurisdiction of the Court a division bench of the Bombay High Court prided over by Mrs sujata Mano as her lordship then was held in rataj paloni Capia versus state of Maharashtra that the exemption from the provisions of the rent control law cast an obligation on the state and its instrumentalities and authorities to comply with the public policy of ensuring a Fair return of investment without charging exor button rates based on the prevailing market price of the land thus a balance has to be struck between ensuring a fair return on investment and charging exor rates based on the prevalent market prices of land which would be of utmost relevance to any other land the state government in order to justify a steep increase in rent cannot plead exploitative increases in prices of lands reference in this connection may also be made in Kumari sria viari versus state of up where in this Court held that while acting in the field of contractual rights the personality of the state does not undergo such a radical change as not to require regulation of its conduct by article 14 it is not as if the requirements of article 14 and contractual obligations are alien concept which cannot coexist our constitution does not envisage or permit unfairness or unreasonable in state action in any sphere of activities contrary to the propes ideals in the Preamble exclusion of article 14 in contractual matters is not permissible in our constitutional scheme in PJ Irani versus state of Madras the Constitution bench observed that the tenant in a building owned by the state or its instrumentality is not liable to eviction Solly because the tency has terminated the existence of R control legislation though not applicable to such building is suggestive of the state policy of protecting tenants because of the great difficulty of their obtaining alternative accommodation in our opinion in the field of contracts the state and its instrumentalities ought to so design their activities as would ensure Fair competition and non-discrimination they can augment their resources but the object should be to serve the public cause and to do public good by resorting to fair and reasonable math the the state and its instrumentalities as the landlords have the liberty of revising the rates of rent so as to compensate themselves against loss caused by inflationary Tendencies they can and rather must also save themselves from negative balances caused by the cost of Maintenance payment of taxes and cost of administration the state as the landlord need not necessarily be a benivolent and good charitable sarian the felt need for expanding or s stimulating its own activities or other activities in the public interest having once a reason the state need not hold its hand from seeking eviction of its lesses however the state cannot be seen to be indulging in R renting profiteering and indulging in Whimsical or unreasonable evictions or Bargains a balance has to be struck between the two extremes having been Exempted from the operation of rent control legislation the courts cannot hold them tied to the same shackles from which the state and its instrumentalities have been freed by the legislature in their wisdom and thereby requiring them to be ruled indirectly or by analogy by the same law from which they are exempt otherwise it would tent amount to defeating the exemption Clause consciously enacted by the legislature at the same time the Liberty given to the state and its instrumentality by the statute enacted under the Constitution does not exempt them from honor ing the Constitution itself they continue to be ruled by article 14 the validity of their actions in the field of landlord tenant relationship is available to the tested and not under the rent control legislation but under the Constitution the rent control legislations are temporary if not seasonal the Constitution is permanent and all time at all time honorable Supreme Court M has reiterated the same principle and has mot followed vadas Mar to which my Lord I had made reference on previous occasions yes in that judgment Bombay High Court's judgment is referred to yes honorable Justice suata manohar's judgment my Lord in jump that case Lord this judgment my Lord which is my Lord explained later on in another judgment Lord and another view is taken but this judgment of division bench of Bombay High Court dated 23rd April 1992 Lord comes very closely to the facts of the case and M Lord with your L's permission I would read M Lord first to Lord have the proper my Lord uh appr appreciation of the effects kindly turn to paragraph two I would very quickly read the facts of this petitions paragraph two all this petition pertain to 48 plots land situated in Mount Mary pandra Bombay the respondent state of Maharashtra is the owner of these plots of land the state had executed long-term Lees in respect of these plots of land in favor of private parties from 197 onwards the petitioners in this R petitions are the present lasses of these 48 plots of land from the state government they have challenged in this R petition a decision of the state government dated 14th March 1986 under which the state government has increased the lease rent in respect of residential plots of Landing question to 25 times what the petitioners were paying as lease rent prior to 1st January 1981 while reviewing the lease of the petitioners for a period of 10 years from 81 to 91 although the rent has been so increased from 81 the decision in this regard has been taken only on 14th March 86 and is intimated thereafter to the petitions a few of the petitioners were informed of this increase as late as in 1991 for the first time that my lords May kindly turn to paragraph 8 we have to examine whether the government resolution of 14th March 86 under which lease period of 48 plots is extended at a revised lease rent for residential plot at the rate of 25 times the rent prevailing as on January 1981 and for commercial plot at 50 times the rent prevailing prior to 1st January 1981 can be considered as fair and reasonable one looking to all the circumstances or whether the action of the state government is arbitrary and unreasonable follow paragraph 10 relevant is last three lines of paragraph 10 this according to the state government itself would be exerimental and unreasonable hence in order to Liston the burden on the lesses the state government took a policy decision recorded in the order of 14th March 86 to charge only 25 times or 50 times the existing Lee rent as the case may be then Lord paragraph 11 refers to stand of the state government then my lords May kindly turn to my Lord the reasoning part malot final paragraph Yes on paragraph 26 yes in this circumstances the petitioners are entitled to succeed we set aside the government resolution of 14th March 1986 and the consequent orders and the notice of demand which have been issued on the petitioner hearing and direct the respondents to renew lies a fresh on terms and conditions based upon principles set out early till such time as new Lee rents are fixed by the state government in accordance with law and the leases are renewed for a reasonable period the petitioner shall continue to pay the existing rent for the period commencing from 1st January 81 onwards until such time as new lease rent is fixed by the state government in accordance with law then lot further uh directions are given Lord honorable Judge Malon in paragraph 20 16 and 19 malot have dealt with these aspects Lord paragraph 14 Lord then I would respectfully urge your Lordships to see paragraph 16 kindly see M this is paragraph 16 it was urged by the respondents that in increasing Lee rent they have not acted unreasonably unfairly or in violation of principles of rent control legislation because they are not seeking to charge rent on the basis of the current market value of the land they have only charged 25 times the previous rank but the respondent do seek to establish that charging 25 times or 50 times of the previous rent is reasonable by referring to what they would have charged for the plot had it been an open plot leased out for the first time now by comparing the new proposed rent with the lease rent based on the current market value of rent the very Norm for comparison is a wrong norm and increase in rent by adopting such standards of comparison would be contrary to the policy underlying rent control legislation otherwise every landlord can justify rent increases in this man all right followed Mr grateful then lastly yes Lord then in Kumari honorable Supreme Court in 191 1 SEC page 212 paragraph 23 24 and 26 I would uh read uh Place stress on those judgments those paragraphs paragraph 23 paragraph 21 and 22 M also deals with the same aspects the principles which have been previously I have read it then paragraph 23 and 24 and finally my Lord paragraph 26 where the honorable Supreme Court refers to my Lord judicial review and contractual powers of public authorities and there the honorable Supreme Court mord reads the principles of article 14 and principles of equality and F since this judgment Lord refers to Lord deals with the same principles for the sake of bravy I rely upon the same but I would not take your lordship's time M again to read M the same principles yes it is relied upon by in the yes yes yes yes then M Lord recently M Lord Bombay high court has Mal though on a different point the petition is not entertained of the petitioners but on the point about how to fix the lease rent Mal yes paragraph 54 may be seen the findings m Issue Number Eight can the government fix the lease rent for lands leased by the government to the petitioners yes by taking into account the value of the land what we say jentri price Lord as for the ready Rea Lord honorable Bombay High Court Mal has referred given findings on this point at paragraph 57 wherein The Honorable court malot has referred to the Judgment of Bombay high court of RTI paloni kapia and other judgments then Lord honorable Bombay High Court mot refers to Jamshed V's case M which I had just uh State brought it to your lordship's kind notice your lordship May yes yes Bombay High Court Ms the findings final findings are in paragraph 67 yes and I would point out that what has been done held by The Honorable Supreme Court it does not rule out taking into consideration the value of the land but to the extent of 25% that was the issue here it is 100% hence to conclude on this issue we are of the opinion that rati paloni kapia does not in any way completely prohibit the government from taking into consideration the value of the land while fixing the lease rent as mentioned earlier by the impat the government has not taken into consideration the full value of the land but has been mindful of the fact that there are sitting Lees on the S land and hence decided that the lease rent would be calculated on the basis of 25% of the value of the land so Le D is that is considered on the basis of 25% okay here it is 100% so would have been 25% the petitioners may be face with this principle that Bombay high court has taken the view I would respectfully submit that anything fixed Beyond 25% would be arbitrary and would fall F of my Lord the principles laid down by honorable Supreme Court in dadas Maria's case in jamshed's Cas and in s yes as far as other submissions M Lord against the petitioners there are two major submissions which are broadly one could I could find it out one is your I would deal with it in the rejoiner but kindly see mot the array of respondents in this petitions in this present petition present petitions respondent number two is the E Surat Municipal Corporation H who is the owner of the land and with whom respondent number four Surat textile Market Cooperative Society has entered into the agreement the stand of Surat Municipal Corporation and respondent number four is that the privity of contract is between Surat Municipal Corporation and Sur textile Market Cooperative Society yes and you are the members therefore you are the members if you have any dispute you go to another po but I have no dispute with Sur textile Cooperative Society therefore the Forum under Section 96 of Gujarat Cooperative societies Act I do not want to go there because I do not have that dispute with next time what I am disputing is M the manner in which Surat Municipal Corporation had fixed the Le amount of such astronomical amount which is agreed by respondent m correct true so in my respectful submissions the petitioners are questioning the decision of Surat Municipal Corporation and and the decision of the state government wherein the resolution of Surat Municipal Corporation is confirmed or approved by the state government so the petitioners are malot challenging this decisions which would be outside the scope and Ambit of section 96 of Gujarat Cooperative society's act because I as members of respondent number four Cooperative Society cannot go to nominees cour against Surat Municipal Corporation or against state of Gujarat saying that you have very at a very high price or very astronomical rate you have fixed the lease be therefore only Forum available to the petitioners is this R petition wherein I the petitioners would raise M the contention that even if the respondent number four has agreed it was the duty of respondent State Surat Municipal Corporation and the state government to see that there is no exploit ation of the members because it is not the society which is to pay the amount Society has transferred the liability to all the members true so what we were otherwise paying my Lord say 3,000 rupees every month or every year now it is my Lord in Lex so that is the area M Lord which is pinching to the petitioners m Lord which is affecting the rights of the petitioners and therefore the petitioners are questioning the decision of Surat Municipal Corporation and the state of Gujarat which is which has approved the state decision and therefore my Lord only course of action available to the petitioners is the jurisdiction of these further calculation is made M this is the last Point yes wherein if M 4% principle of increase would have been made for 50 years if is turn to next page turns the page mode it would be 36467 instead of that it is 1 26 lakhs minimum main amount so if there is 4% increase every year every year compound first year is it is so that increase is also added into the next year youres may kindly see 51315 4% so it comes to 252 so it is 53367 next year that is the I'm grateful to your yes yes Mr P you would be CR cross the the society is also it is a society right the society Busy Body I strongly disapprove that petition it's a busy body the petition he's a public interest spirited so it is filed by this textile Market he's not our member he is out to spoil our matter no but he so he's not the society no he's not the he challenging entire he says that he has no Locus to inter into our internal office followed yes yes I am a uh elected corporator yes corporator yes my in opposition now I have challenged I have Council and corporator if my lords may see article four 243 W of constitution of India that will suffice my Locust okay and that will also uh I'll will also demonstrate the powers and duties which the the municipality is bound under constitution of India correct all right yes 243 W yes Powers Authority and responsibility of municipalities Etc if I please subject to provisions of this constitution the legislature of state may by law Ando a the municipalities with such powers and Authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institution of self-government and such law may contain Provisions for Devolution of powers and responsibility upon municipalities subject to such condition as may be specified here in with respect to now these are the points which municipalities has do there to pre of preparation of plan of Economic Development and social justice now the commercial aspect which I'll point out this will fall under preparation of plan two performance of functions and implementation of schemes as may be interested to them including those in relation to the matter listed in 12th schedule B the Committees with such powers and authorities as may be necessary to enable them to carry out responsibility conferred upon them including those in relation to the matter listed in 12 schedule now I being an elected I am Duty bound under subclause B correct to ensure the responsibility conferred in relation to the matters in the 12th schedule the my lords may have the 12 12 schedule yes the D schedu are there are 18 points urban planning including town planning regulation of land use and construction of buildings planning for economic and social development now others are there mainly will be roads and bridges that there everything will be main water supply for domestic commercial nine will be seen safeguarding the interest of weaker section of society including the handicaps and mentally in all there are other promotion burial cattle and public amenities there is no uh specific to develop any commercial activity only the the municipality is obliged to plan so municipality has has in in the arguments they have stated that the particular land is been an year marked for commercial activities yes now I won't repeat all the resolution which my learned friend has read only just to summarize in 1967 the land was allotted to the society for 50 year Le now this the the regulation under which the current uh resolutions were passed that is the regulation it has a regulation uh which says Gujarat town planning Urban Development act the urban area Development Authority reg uh disposal of land regulation now that regulation came in 2002 in my um submission once the regulation are enforced the corporation has to restrict itself is bound by the Bound by the regulation they cannot go beyond the regulation you are right now uh page 19 of my petition is the first resolution resolution one uh resolution number first resolution which says TP scheme number Revenue survey number so and so final plot 141 y Jag tender jat haraj deposit of land and other property regulation resolutions are passed under regulation 13 if my Lord may see page 33 of my petition I have I have already annexed the entire regulation the regulation 13 is important allotment of land site development rights or special cases The Authority may receive an offer from institution charitable trust educational and research Institution societies religious trust for development of an institution of a deaf and dump or blind person sports complex and any other such development which would be beneficial to general public and the society as a whole in such cases Authority May apply to the government for permission for recommendation for allotment of plot land in particular or the decision of government shall be final yes so this is the main Crux of my matter that that regulation says that only on the specific cases where it is for the uh develop it is for the development and beneficial to general public and a society as a whole now I'll just point out what the exact what the respondent society is doing respond Society initially land was given on that on that land respondent Society built up a shopping complex now this shopping complex ongoing they have uh leased out the those offices and complex hotels there are banks there is post office which my L has read get their post office and everything now these falls under commercial activities even the shops there is no social activity carried out on this land only business activities are carried out now when commer activities are there then regulation 13 won't be applicable it will fall under regulation 8 page 31 mys yes it says development and disposal of commercial area or neighborhood plots commercial land shall be disposed of by auction and inviting trender through prominent daily newspapers the premium price shall not be less than the prevailing Mark or the reserve price whichever is more follow now resolution which was which is in under challenge that is based on jentry value not the market value on that count also since it is for commercial activities this resolution ought not to have been passed and deserves to be cost and satisfied now on the building part page 87 building an 87 is an representation by the society if my lords may come to page 88 that this is the letter was extensively read through it it talks about the taex and the pending rent which is to be collected if my lords may see number number one number two number two ta refund 42 number four the amounts are not sub even the commercial activities are not a small commercial activities where it goes beyond it's a full fled business Hub correct if my lords may see page 90 what Society has to say to the condition of the building itself the building itself is 50 years old my lords have day in day out there are Redevelopment petitions 30 years old are are to be redeveloped this building is itself 50 years old oh you are there you are right I was there on the last date of hearing yes so in my submission the building also is old okay so then you come to the main point how are you agreed I am agreed because under Artic I am I have to see that the uh society as whole and the rules are being followed okay I have stated I have gone through the schedule so you you are a corporator I am a corporator so you must be a member of the general body indeed ma'am tamaru objections and I have raised objection even you are the sole person no there are other objections which were raised I have attached all the objections raised at the relevant point of time but why are you coming in if there is some development l in the city how is it prejudicial in your according to you for the development for those members who are residing or are who are having their shops it's a commercial complex it appears that since 1965 there is a lease which is continuing it must have come to an end and in view thereof minute you want them you want that there should be some new development should take place and they should be dislocated what is your intention mind and this it's year mark for commercial activities commercial activities permissible the process is followed here the land is only sold land is only leased not the shops shops they have constructed and they are earning in profit on that one has the right to one's livelihood how are you concerned livelihood Al be doing some business no my St my say is regulations ought not to have molded to that effect to give privilege to certain class of people but that uh no certain class of people why what is what is that privilege that is here there is a member who is agreed by that they have agreed but the amount in my hum submission is very low 50,000 is the market I have Ed in my application also per shop 50,000 while they have considered the jentry rate by which Mr Jan's clients are agreed according to you it should be auction very good and auction it cannot mold no other objection my only objection that that the rate of market value there is loss to public X Checker because of that that I have a in my petition because only lost to public a checker since it is not sold not given as per the regulation hence I am before my lords regulation eight eight if my lords may see I have in my application it's regulation eight is at page 31 31 regulation eight of the this in fact for each and every uh gondra there are different regulation seven is for playground eight is for commercial nin is for educational 10 is for medical 11 is for residential 12 is for employees of the authority 13 is specifically for the class of person who are literally affected which are Duff and D blind Sports Complex for the benefit of general public at large so 13 cannot be molded to benefit certain class of people for commercial activities but in the present casee whether there was any option no no option there was no so option under such circumstances then tenders are required to be called for two prominent Daily newspaper and then naturally it would the premium price it should not be less than the market price market price the market price will in the present case there is no option there is no option they have molded they have molded 13 to use 13 and without auction given on lease otherwise they have to for if the procedure is followed they have to give a public auction and in that the society may also apply everyone can apply correct for commercial it's for commercial activity only the land cannot be used for residential purpose as of now this is my only because the loss which I have stated in my petition that counting 60 uh 50,000 per office per per shop there is a appro monetary loss of 61 CR to the public ex Checker 10% loss at 99 years and and another Point only land is given Not Just J okay the market value yes my clients have not joined I may point out this I know out of 120 there are 120 Municipal corporators and here is the petitioner number only petitioner before your La shs who is agree that is one secondly petitioner is not Municipal Corporation Municipal Corporation is different my learned friend refers to mot constitutional provisions and says that these are the Constitutional Provisions in relation to municipality but my learn friend is not municipality he does not satisfy the taste and definition of municipality he's only one living individual out of 120 persons and if he is agree by the resolution he was M voted down by majority in corporation M being a local Authority Democratic principles would Prevail and democracy requires that majority wish will remain and if the majority has passed the resolution the petitioners task of objecting comes to an end the moment mot petitioner has participated so then it answers your petition also no as far as his I am agre by his entering into this subject according to the my clients petitioner is a busy body he has no concern whatsoever true with respect to the subject matter except the fact that he is elected counselor by some thousands voters but he doesn't represent Surat Municipal Corporation just so therefore he has no Locus at all except M making mord creating mord a disturbance in this in our okay all right and there are other objections by other corporator which I have annexed at page 102 103 those are there other corporators who have objected to the sun Municipal Corporation regarding uh allotment giving up on lease if I if my want to see page 102 you may whatever you want to S I only thing that I am there but there was other objections also which were raised it must be so page2 it's by Assam Assam Clea corpor councilor Sur Municipal Corporation he has read raise objection on 45 2008 then page 103 where uh uh election Ward number 18 Ward suiti they they have raised objection and earlier also the petitioner approached this honorable code since it will come I'll just point out there is one order at page 142 yes objections were raised but the PO argument that regulation 133 that was not raised to the respondents so page 142 I I approached this honorable court at earlier point of time yes and it was withdrawn with Liberty to move uh move a representation and page 144 is my detailed representation pointing out that regulation 813 won't be applicable if my lords may see yes they have resolved under regulation 30 13 yes I okay for that am I earlier sea was also annexed and everything was submitted there was no response H this petition is again fil right okay thank you yes who would be Mr P that you never told us what is your request the M was part so I I not dra the my request for next 20th Monday Monday 30th 3 today we are huh in the I got the message that it may be on 20 20 of September yes my is keeping this Fridays yes on 13 there are many this matter isot since last three weeks is that this is going under that situ keep on next yes let it be on Friday then if you are not then you may please for the time being let it be on Friday so sorry not at all I also sorry should anyone matter was not part I mention Mr Jani has been mentioning the matter so otherwise I would have also stated Let It Be place for final disposal but it is kind of because I hurt so it is not right okay M the Lear Senor found with Mr in 21292 and Mr the Le that appearing in SCA 548 of need to post the matter for further hearing s one it is not possible let him be here I I'm not and he not as for back let him be here keep back yes yes yes theef that sabti R front before it was developed there were thousands of family which were residing there so uh Amad Municipal Corporation has initiated project with regard to development of saati river front and you can take the mic yes definitely me sometimes please my I'll be loud little loud please pleas okay then how are you agree Mr G are you before the court yes Madam the uh as it was being developed without uh L background is necessary for for the matter so my as it was being developed my the persons who were residing the those hutman dwellers without accommodating them or rehabil them remobilizing them without uh without caring this uh whole done my Lord they have started demolishing their HS so few demolition of these the presidential area yes the those HS were the EMC started demolishing those HS so some of the petitioners as well as in 2005 some of as well as one uh public interest litigation came to filed before this honorable court and my various orders came to be passed with regard to that my yes and as the matter came before this honorable Court honorable division bench my Lord as the orders came to be pass my Lord I'll request my Lord to those order starts from page number 44 Mal married this repetition has been listed on mentioning by a number of hman ders living on the bank of river saati in the lat letter addressed to The Honorable chief justice today dated so and so they played that they are poor hutman ders living on the bank of the river saati for the last many years have no other place for shelter all of a sudden when the court has seized with uh what is the order my Lord now my Lord various orders came to be pass my I'll request yes mil I'm I'm coming to the point only kindly open a page number 50 my Lord there in total number of families which was produced by total number of families which was affected as per AMC was 5964 and the petitioners also at the relevant point of time submitted their number of families that is 4,319 my with regard to accommodate accommodating these number of families Mal The Honorable high this honorable Court was pleased to issue certain directions we start from page number 58 now my Lord the uh at relevant point of time as the construction was going on with regard to settling them to uh different different location almost 12 to 15 locations which was pointed out by the AMC that those were to be constructed and in flats and to be rehabilitated by the these hutman dwellers now my Lord there is a direction of Rehabilitation yes there are directions of you may come to that I'm I'm I'm there at only page 58 the directions are at page 71 initial directions I'm I'm I'm I'm taking my not to yes am I with my considering this uh was the order yes orders different subsequent ORD subsequent orders so so where from you fall within which category yes my Lord and who are you I I'm we are the persons who were rehabilit at sikander Buck nagar okay my Lord so that part is over yes we were what is your at page number 59 paragraph number five May kindly be seen now the direction was with regard uh so far as the rest of 2016 uh residential units are concerned the Amad Municipal Corporation will inform the court by 9th September 2011 whether such units have been completed or not in that case the families will be directed to shift to the their respective residence units within a month now some of the uh and four also my me see I'll just read my okay the Amad muncipal Corporation will inform the court as to whether 278 for residential unit have been completed or not if it is completed then the court will grant them one month's time to shift their respective aded residency units now I'll request myot to page number 76 yes P paragraph number three m'am yes a serious serious grievance has been addressed it is just a background my Lord bear with me five minutes I will be able to justify whatever try to understand your difficulty it is it is just a brief facts a serious gance has been redressed that the corporation ought not have undertaken the demolition drive as 1,2 project affected family who have been actually allocated the facts have not been able to shift and occupy the flats as they are not habitated habitable according to Mr substantial work is still to be completed in the said flats and it is not possible for the project affected families to shift to those Flats it is also brought to our notice that so far as the batch of so and so affected families are concerned the exercise of identifying the families is under progress and on adducing the necessary evidence in this regard a list will be finalized by the corporation and those will be those families will also be allocated FS now my Lord uh Direction which my Lord was indicating 51 at page number 77 so far as so and so project affective families are concerned we direct that each each of the project affected family shall be immediately shift to the allocated flats and take over the possession so and so appearing for them so assur that IM shift to the flats allocated to take over them learned Mr assured that the whatever pending work is to be undertaken the same will be completed by December 2011 now my Lord at page number 79 even the last two lines May kindly be seen some of the families who were not the these 1,2 uh 12 persons 112 persons they were shifted to Ganesh nagar as people as Mal in the campsites yes and some of them were allotted flats and those those Flats were under construction they were not completed because of the direction issu issued by this The Honorable High Court my Lord under constructed flat were given to allotted to the concern U dwellers then then my Lord photographs of ganes it is there my yes it is a page number 93 these are these are still there they have not been allotted any flats that you are not alloted these are some of those person okay then you are not conern I'm concerned with the persons who are residing at sikander Buck nagar malot who were given the under under constructed Flats okay and the work was not compl did you take possession yes we have taken possession we have also should be done now my the what what is the RIT that is to be issued now yes my Lord my Lord we were allotted Flats we were granted uh the prayers so that I know what you want to say upon allotment what has happened yes we were alled flaters who have been served to demolish the premises my demol 2010 the flats were alloted page 108 the imped yes ma'am okay my Lord I'm requesting I I'll come to that my 2010 Flats were allotted now it has been 2023 my Lord they send us the uh notices with regard to DED conditions of the flats which was already under construction which when we were we were allotted my request is this wise that my Lord when a flat is consider constructed various permission has to be uh uh taken place certificate has to be taken my by the concern person who are who is the developer it is the and AMC and the order these are the two concern authorities who Grant such certificates to the concern developer with regard to whether the whether safety is concerned whether the material has been used in that particular structure has been concerned my Lord with regard to everything my Lord even when the completion has been done once it is completion completion certificate is also been granted my Lord cor these are these are the facts my Lord now my Lord without completing these my Lord we were allotted those Flats under the pressure of this honorable Court's order my Lord thereafter my you accepted that order yes yes we accept my Lord we accepted the allotment also my my friend may not speak in you concentrate on what you want my Lord those under constructed flat were allotted thereafter nothing has been done now when nothing has been done with regard to even the society my Lord the it is Duty so you are you are challenging this notice of 3723 yes ma'am at page 108 as pointed out one second yes one8 now okay let us ask Mr what is his answer to this before before my Lear friend this is the only thing right that having allotted such houses or apartments in 10 years my Lord 10 years they ised a notice for to demolish because they are in dilit condition now for the allotment which was made by them they themselves are seeking demolition because they are demolition or my they saying it it it is in the dilated condition reason being my Lord saying that how that could happen so now that if it is so then what is your next prayer my prayer is this wise my Lord once that that is why our our was I was I was Raising contention with regard to the permission and the certificates which is issued by everything suppose the permissions they are there they are not there whatever it may be yes but today you are responsibility come upon so then what is the what is suppose upon issuance of this notice then what is the rate that you are seeking request should not be such notice should not have been issued or even though it is in dilated condition you should be permitted to continue what is it who will take that responsibility yes my Lord that is what the major question is my Lord that who will take the responsibility when it is constucted by AMC and tender yes followed I constucted by AMC The Tender has been issued to one synx synx limited my Lord who has con constructed that and my Lord when it is not completed it is to be completed it is their duty to complete damages no my Lord I'm requesting my Lord when if they are saying that it is in the diated conditions who will be responsible for you are right but for something that is transp Lord then what can be suppose everything we day in and day out we come across then for the are you saying that they are the see sometimes we come across petitions where they say that we no though they have issued the notice the it is the condition of the building is such that it is habitable so according to you it is a habitable building my when you file an undertaking but it is habit habitable what I saying is my Lord my Lord my request is despise my Lord that if they saying that is diated conditions M they may reconstruct and G given it to us in in okay so then that is your conention right okay that you reconstruct and give it to give it to us all right because we we don't have any other place to go because followed okay all are socially weaker section of the society my Lord they cannot afford a flat there you are right yes ma'am yes Mr we'll continue in the second half or on some other day no second whatever is convenient for me can continue myship serial number 41 is of the senior citizen four applicants are died during the until not that I want any clarification but as there was a query put to us that Authority letter is a request by the registry because of which they would not circulate the matter that is not the it is not the resolution is not the resolution for individual employees before The Honorable Court it is that is how it was not numbered and placed before the H just but it was a query that was put by the court that is all thank you matter I was asked item one yesterday yes yes uh where is m smoke the after I passed the order Ive not signed the order but I would be modifying the relief the final relief to some extent very because after I passed the order I realized that I'm washing that order of 2010 right which is pursuant to that back because I have relied on that SK kapor SK Kapoor and uh b yog b y cor cor so if when I'm relying on yogin B that notice would not survive Cor correct and therefore it would be open for them to issue a fresh if rules provide so that is what I was but that was required to be stated because of I passed the order in the open fa but that obviously that modification can be done but still it is important of on for the courot that is why I was wanting both so I need not re notify the M yes or not not at all okay leadership P 19 requesting for some accommodation okay for accommodation you need not that is the half reality it's absolutely the icon I'm not I'll once I see the matter I can put it on top of the board if I have not opened the matter I don't want to take but I'll consider your request nonetheless I'll consider your request yes M serial number serial number 34 yes 34 to 39 my this is the group matter where the okay I'm aware of the matter the compliance report was to be filed and it is for the hearing today but the compliance report is still not filed my Lord Monday but then every every Friday this kind some I we accommodate you so that to come for compliance that that's not bad a statement was made okay yes last open but was not okay suggested that either I'll issue the fresh notice I I tried I not issued notice Miss rule is okay all right so what is your submission to accept it okay so notice so I was inclined to issue but I thought that since the advocate is all right so what is to be done fresh notice is to be issue okay issue fresh you are going to take direct service yes it's a ruled matter so fresh rule will have to be issue whenever you want whenever you want after okay okay yes yesly as as ADD okay so you are seeking permission to F to place the reply on permission has PR for is granted register to accept the same okay CH as well as additional okay okay yes Mr Vick no it on Friday let it be on Friday difficult comp we have we recorded Mr yeah otherwise then we will hear it finally rather than going for civil application I would rather hear it finally you should be happy that the matter is taken up finally I request for next and they comp okay CH yes huh at page 13 h 9 b m issue appropriate order for direct show and be pleas to qu and set aside the action of the respondent authorities in issuing notice dated 3rd July 2023 an ex now this is important whereby The respondent Authority has issued a notice to so and so flat owners of including present petitioners families who have been served with notice to demolish the premises IE sikander so and so aasa beura noted by the central government constructed by the Urban Development Urban housing department my lords May oblige me by coming directly to the said notice at page 108 yes so the petitioner understanding of the notice at page 108 third July 2023 it is a demolition this my lords is a notice under Section 265 of the gpmc corre if I may read the second unnum correctc so and so I have not called for demolition correct so the premise that the petition is built on is a is a misgiving there is no endeavor on part of the corporation to demolish this petition was filed almost one year ago yes we have not demolished in fact after this prior to the monsoon of 2024 we have issued a fresh public notice and similar notice to the petitioners which is not challenged my lords May for a moment have the gpmc yes by gpmc yes yes okay and lot ships may please have 265 yes it shall be incumbent on the owner of every building to maintain every part thereof and everything apperent there to in such repairs as to prevent it becoming dangerous the commissioner May by return notice require the owners of any building to get building inspected at such interval and in such manner as may be prescribed in the bylaws the owner shall within two months I may skip that and four a report of every inspection under subsection two shall forth with be submitted to the commissioner expense in Cut shall be paid by owner this is the notice I have issued yes my learned friend's petition is premised on 268 my lords may have 268 which I have not issued cor despite a year of the notice dated third July having been issued so the only thing that I have sounded the petitioners off and this was if my lords may please oblige me again by having page 108 and reference may be seen prior to this notice being issued in fact I issued a public notice yes on 6th June 2023 correct and there after the present impune communication I have no intention of demolishing I have only sounded the petitioners that it is high time that they take care of their structur and therefore in my respectful submission the petition is premature without cause of action and deserves to be dismissed there is nothing more to be add please again I'll read the 108 my Lord paragraph number two yes GPM Municipal Corporation building by law man license structur engineer upon we have gone through this notice you may take instruction else I'll pass the order my Lord before before parting with my may I request my Lord to uh regulations for residential Township 2009 yes my Lord here in my Lord my basic contention was with regard to that the structure which has been you have challenged this right yes page one now upon reading the page 108 it is a notice under 265 yes what does it provide yes therefore you cannot the that is issu that that is my Lord me kindly kindly also read page number 39 my Lord I may take my page number 39 yes if that if that is the page which is under challenge which is it is not only the uh 9B it is other other prayers also there huh so it cannot be said that it is it is filed premature issue appropriated Direction and be pleased to C and set aside the notice dated so and so whereby the respond authority issue notice so and so including families who have been served with a notice to vacate the premes alloted so and so under it is allotted under so and so schemes by so and so on the ground that condition of the building blocks has been detated and therefore if at all any human life is lost due to fall falling of any building block then Amad Municipal Corporation will not be held responsible which has been allotted to the petitioner from 2010 to 2014 as the same is vality of article 21 and then the you are not but it is not it is contrary what to what you have argued yes no my Lord no it is not yes you are asked you said you submitted that you were asked to demolish and it should be at cost and if the this is what you submitted you may go through your own submission no my Lord I what no no no my Lord I have I I have not argued with regard to demolition my I I argued with regard to that the I have been given I have been allotted under constructed flats and which was alloted in 2010 you may have to take some other relief you will have to file other petition if if the structure that that is why I was I was requesting for my Lord to see the regulations for residen in Township it is is under the town planning and Urban Development act 1976 so yes which are the regulations regulation for residential Township 2009 they are fing a part of the record this is uh this is the I just so which which regulation are you relying on regulation for residential Township 2009 yes yes but there would be a regulation of yes uh I'm relying upon regulation 10 12 12 18 and 19 right please your now uh I'll read along with my Lord once they okay they are governed by which is the parent Municipal Corporation my Lord yes the it is it is uh uh if my Lord May may I pass my copy loud yes regulation nine 10 10 which is talking about the uh socially socially socially and economically section society and for their housing my 12 responsibilities of Township developer yes yes and then 18 and 19 supervision and monitoring of quality and 19 my Lord grievance addressing yes mam so we have raised our grievance before the authorities mhm true and if if 18 is considered M then 12 and 18 is considered my Lord it is sole responsibility of the person who has developed this and it is not my lord of the record I'm saying it is not only this particular society it is it is all there similar situation is there in vwa od asarwa they are not before this honorable just put putting before this honorable yes yes so if may I read my Lord that uh you may read I have read yes I'll read my Lord 12 12.10 yes on uh issue of building use permission the township developers shall execute a bank guarantee equivalent to 2% of the cost incurred for the infrastructure the author Authority shall revoke this Bank guarantee if required to maintain the infrastructure on the expiry of the maintenance period this guarante shall be converted into a corpus fund of the members of The Cooperative Society now my now to uh regulation number 18 supervision and monitoring of the quality of constructions to ensure that the quality of construction of the public purpose infrastructure to prescribe Authority shall appoint a consultant who would supervise the quality And Timely execution of the project the scheme of the or supervision dep deposit 2% of estimated cost of public purpose infrast such deposit shall be refunded once the consultant issue ACC complient certificate now my in the present case my Lord it was not completed therefore uh regulation number 19 correct any occupant of uh building who is entitled for the use of facilities shall have a right to log his complaint before the prescribed Authority the prescribed Authority shall on the merits address the issue to direct the developer to resolve this issue May resolve this issue by reconstruction reconstructing repairing at the cost of the developer and 19.3 the prescrib authority shall recover the cost by re the bank guarantee for the cost incurred for the work required to be done by the prescribe Authority as per uh as per the above Clause now in the present case my Lord my Lord May kindly see the pictures at page number 124 that is the picture of the society correct which is in issue my if my Lord may see my Lord the condition roads were not developed correct the construction if my Lord me see the the rods are visible true you are right and there is no s sanitation facility has been provided my at page number 26 my Lord May kindly see the water has been accumulated and there's no drainage proper drain drainage system and page number 127 Mar the balconies have been reconstructed by the resent itself cor and page number 133 my we can kindly see it's a Terrace my Lord yes where only rods are there any construction for suppose any construction which has taken 10 to 12 years back my this will not come into the present situation true if it is constructed with a proper proper material true agreed yes I agree and my Lord uh I'll one more request my Lord uh if my Lord is having this civil application yes of course I page number 22 yes this it's totally has submerged the the floor has totally has been submerged my Lord then my Lord see the other two pictures down my Lord a person is standing my Lord look at the height my in one portion it is around five 5T and another portion it is only three uh two to three F not even that page number 23 these are the poor people my Lord I'm my my request is only with regard to that that either either they they make as per the regulation they may reconstruct it or and as well as M initiate appropriate action against those persons who have who have made such mistakes my because under whose supervision my Lord such construction has taken place and now their life has been in danger my that is the only request my Lord I have come yes and with regard to n 9B my Lord 9 9B which my learn no no PR 9B M yes 9B I I I will not press for 9B I will I'm pressing for C and D M right because that will not solve the purpose B Direction yes m that is I with I understand my Lord that is that is the prayer with regard to demolition which I made my Lord that is you are not pressing B I'm not pressing 9B okay okay e yes ma'am c e and all the pH I'm pressing then then this ISU notice to n then if you are not pressing B then what is the consequence you may read C whether it is an independent prer yes I'll read again it is your petition yes maam it is it is with regard to that they they they are saying as per the notice my Lord which they have issued at page number 108 my they are saying if anything happens if any block goes down myot Falls then they will not be responsible for that okay whether so my request that it is to re it may be reconstructed and given back to them because they don't they don't have any other choice yes 5,000 people M where they will go corre because their home had already been taken for for the development of uh rer FR okay yes Mr V uh Mr V the photographs which are on record they appear to be Dil ped it appears that if this photograph is a correct photograph at page 138 if a building is U constructed and if it was a building which is constructed before 10 years under such circumstances the quality of the building is such that how would one reside and if it is under somea submission my learned friend relies on the regulations of 200 h regulation for residential Township the first of the regulations that is relied on is 12.10 12.10 is in connection with infrastructure yes which is can you give it to the sure sir def my lords may have regulation 3.9 yes regulation 3.9 defines infrastructure yes infrastructure shall include Road Street Open Spaces Parks playgrounds recreational ground water electricity Supply and in that context if now regulation 12.10 which is cited by my learned friend is SE yes this is uh a misunderstood reference because 12.10 would not apply to the facts of the case 12.10 is for peripherial infrastructure yes that's submission number one submission number two my learned friend relies on regulation 19 grievance redressal huh which is the prescribed Authority under these regulations yes and that prescribed Authority is the state level screening committee yes and thereafter another Authority which is in the nature of an appell body correct my learned friends contentions come for the first time 12 years after the units are allotted to the petitioners and only after I issue notice under 265 the structures in question are in a slightly hazardous condition because of unauthorized en unauthorized extensions done by these petitioners today if my learned friend does not press prayer 9B as he has made a statement then 9 C is a connected relief that is 9 D and D are reliefs in the which can either be pursued in suit Remedy or before the prescribed Authority Under This Very regulation that my learned friend relies on correct so if he's relying on these regulations then the remedy lies under for the prescribed Authority underation 19 therefore Reliance is placed on these regulations then the remedy lies under 19 19 therefore since my friend has now forone 9B yes and we are left with CDE C is also was and set aside now so DND is before prescribed Authority and therefore I started by saying that there was no cause of action because the apprehension was without reading the notice at page 108 they said this is a demolition notice this is a notice under 265 therefore in my respectful submission this petition does not deserve to be entertained and at best it is always open for the petitioner to go before the prescribed Authority I'm grateful heard Mr the learc Mr G the learing for the respond you would be appearing for the corporation would be appearing for 3 five and six State Corporation and the riverfront Authority right 35 and by way of has petition the petitioner here has for the where have you stated your Locus Mr who are you you must have we res of in which paragraph do I find for your reference one you are all of you are before the court yes ma'am no only 124 not on 9 99 the res some of the are the [Music] res yes zind consisting of 5,000 residents in and in total 9 199 just submitted that the S residency it would be a residency the s s area s it would be in the nature of a residency the dwelling unit div sanitation facilities there are debr is water loging and due to the for the resident time and again suffer various infections and diseases by way of present the petition hearing has challenged the notice issued by the respondent corporation under Section 265 of the dated 3723 which is duly produced page 10 it is the case of the fatian that upon issuance of such notice the the same notice is issued by the respondent authority on all the flat owners including the petitioners families who have been asked to W the premises allotted to 992 families which consist of more than 5,000 people under the jawah Neu urban renewal Mission scheme ploted by the central government constructed under the urban develop Urban housing department government for settlement and Rehabilitation thousands of residents residing at the bank of rer sa for construction of R saati River Front allotted byad Municipal corporation on the ground that the condition of building blocks has been deteriorated and if at all any human life is lost before falling of the building then the Amad Municipal Corporation will not be held responsible which has been a lot of the petitioners for the year from the year 2010 to 15 and have further break for a direction upon the respond authorities to constitute high level committee and investigate and initiate disciplinary action against the concerned offices who have constructed the same of to residential Township residential units with such material and fashion that it will become dialated with only 10 to years handing possession with the petitions as other citizens who are relocated and rehabilit from the saati river B and have further fa pray for issuance of appropriate R out on Direction upon the respond authorities from restraining the responding authorities from evacuating the present place of residence which is a g da with the Imp notice issued to the petitioners and other residents of the society on 3720 mrot The leared Advocate appearing for the submits that the petitioners hearing belong to economically weaker section of the society who the petitioners hearing were alloted the a for SE resid fls in the year 2010 within a period of 10 to 11 years upon their residing in the sa res State Apartments The respondent Authority has issued the noce Imp under Section 26 265 of the ACT asking the petitioners toet the premises it is submitted that appropriate action be taken against such officers who constructed such a society which has resulted in very the construction is such that the petitioners and other other residents are I think building the buildings are in know dilapidated condition for aspect we investigated Mr Reliance on the regulation for residential Township 2009 more particularly regulations stand 128 and 19 submits that the petitioners are governed by the S regulations and in light of Theos uh it is the duty of the respondent corporation to act in accordance with the St regulations Reliance is placed on Section regulation number 10 which provides that provides for infrastructure for socially and economically weaker section housing scwh and other infrastructure section 12 responsibilities of the township development section 18 supervision and monitoring of the quality of construction SE regulation fac gance regressive Bing Rel on is submitted that the respond Authority be directed to act in accordance with the for regulations submitted that the uh upon in the course of hearing Mr G upon instructions does not press prayer a which is very A6 has six washing of the notice issued by the respond Authority so Dy producer page Mr The Advocate appearing for the respond Authority at the outset place Reliance on the notice which is in will produced at an exchange e collectively at page 108 and states that the notice is issued on the 265 of the ACT faing Reliance on the on Section 265 of the act it is submitted that the same provides for periodic inspection of the buildings this further submitted that after issuance of the notice under Section 265 of the act the respondent authority has also issued before issuing the notice this public notice was issued Mr my Lord and this is referred in yes the notice before issuance of the notice under Section 265 the respondent corporation is should public notice with respect to the dilapitated condition the buildings the same notices are produced on record and the same Artic on record dated 6623 it is submitted that even after issuance of the Impe notice on 3723 the respondent corporation has issued two other notices which are not subject matter of challenge it is submitted that no action is taken by the corporation seeking dispossession or eviction or demolition of the buildings as stated by the LA appearing for the petitions placing Reliance on the regulations of for a residential Township 2009 Reliance is placed on regulation 39 3.9 which provides for infrastructure placing Reliance on the scene it is submitted that reliance infrastructure includes page 184 we will retain the book once we have it I we will mark it and then share so placing Reliance on the it is submitted that if the petitioner is seeking the it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is governed by the S regulations under such circumstances the S regulation the petitioner is May Avail the remedy available under section 19 of the regulations which provides for grievances for provides that the Grievances are to be resolved by prescribed Authority there purum there to there is also an appellate Authority provided under Section constituted on Section 13 19.3 of the state regulations Rel it is submitted that the Bri has PR for the present petition remat the respondent corporation has taken no such steps as stated by the Republican hearing the petition is required to be dismissed having heard the Learned Advocates appearing for the respective party that is the petitioner hearing has Mr G the LA advate does not press the challenge qu noce ined 3723 po upon considering the fored for Relief spread in in paragraph 9 C it is bre that while setting aside the notice dated 3723 the sa notice is issued to 99 of flat owners including the petitioners who have being served the notice to V the premises under the jnn mission fled by the central government constructed by the Urban Development and housing Urban housing government of Gujarat for resettlement and Rehabilitation thousands of residents residing at the bank of river sabti for construction of River Front allotted by the on the ground that the condition of the building blocks has been deteriorated and therefore if at all any human life is lost due to Falling of the building then AMC will not be held responsible which has been alloted to the British from 2010 to 2014 St the it is further PR that to constitute a high level committee to investigate and initiate disciplinary action against those who constructed the sa residential uh units having come considering the oppos prayers as by the applicant hearing for the sa prayers the British it is open for the petitioner to approach the competent Forum seeking such prayers if the it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is regulated by the regulation of residential TR shs 2009 it is open for the petitioner to approach the competent Authority Under Sage s regulations for the forgoing reasons no interferences for for the prayers as PR for in the present petition the notice having been issued the notice which is the subject matter of challenge under Section 265 of the ACT is not pressed grateful ma'am o sure sure dispose of dispose this isop yes yes Mr but there's only one person is left out yes you are right and has suggested me to file application for transposition of that yes I fil it Lear has objected has to pass the order on it no civil application is it P or see one of 24 is one of 24 order one rule d all now after that lordship may take up this matter because because the entire project been St up by this person his suit is only for the getting bigger flat only my Lord then Mr if I the CH I permit I allowing this then respon number four whoever is supporting us my he will only support us he will not file any proceeding my as on suggestion I accepted because I don't want to carry further technical in the matter I I thought it fit because the court would yes yes I understand immediately accepted and therefore I file application therefore he will only support only so there are so many ways this is a this is this is only see to it that it project goes through my Mr what is the number of 24 my Lord I have file the reply against the application I have not called upon H this is what is the reason that is assigned by you Mr I assigned a developer I'm a society Society pass resolution appointing him that he has undertaken the process plan section everything is s so he is not vacing therefore by society and Bel come before the court for him package so we can construct and give him the flat M of that is his only now therefore my lordship suggest that he is a independent identity contractor why join Co make him respondent I file trans application nothing else said yes that is only it is permissible the law it is under order one rule 10 the court has power at any state strike out to add parties my Lord yes reply it is respectfully submitted the P civil application neither meable not able under the law because in civil application the applicants have not sted under which provision of law the present civil application is it is further subed that the applicants have not stated in the present civil application that any conflict of interest has arisen between them during the pendency of the special civil application on theing par five of the present application now kindly see par five of the application vers yes in par five stated by the applicant that the applicant submit that the applicant number one is claiming subal relief from The Honorable Court as for the provision of the Gujarat H FL Act 1973 and the applicant number two is the beneficiary of the s yes so there is no conflict of interest between the two petitioner yes if there is any conflict of interest between the two petition then one can be joined as a transpose as a respondent this is my submission than order one rule 10 yes sub rule two court May at any stage of the proceeding either upon or upon my without application also upon or without the application of either party and on such a temps as may appear to the court to be just ordered that name of the party improperly joined whether is plaintive or defendant be struck out and that name of any person who sought to be have been joined whether as plenty for defend or whose presence before the court May necessary in to enable the code effectually and complete to and settle all the question in the suit he had be added otherwise my as for May accept I did not come before the court my i i two jointly come before the all right but then let it the court suggested so I all felt that therefore I immediately I did not way there are number of ways even if you don't file transposition so you can seek deletion of the number two and he can always be joined yes there are ways but it is up to you as to how you want to approach therefore I suggested because I felt that it may not happen that the court never yes yes and therefore I immediately accepted L shipment but gr it and it will be like somebody appears my office so many beneficiaries for at the instance of the society the others should not suffer no we are ready to give him the flat he is not going to accept that Mr this was suggested by the court only to facilitate to that the M the merits of the matter are not affected affected and so I I will allow this transpose heard Mr the Learned advocate of that submitted respond number two is a develop with whom the respond petitioner number one petitioner number two has entered into M for redevelopment of Ls history it is submitted that the by resolution and majority M5 out of6 members AG for opponent number five agreed to revelop executed the with the opponent number five is the object four four four four four four number four number five also vated he has vacated doing petition my and has also agreed for redevelopment and executed with to Del him he has Ved I'm applicant number one is claiming substantial in the matter to hand over the peaceful and bant Poss of flat number it would be 10 upon One X as 10 and yes X1 B X1 of society so that Redevelopment can be undertaken by the applicant number the applicant number two is developer and therefore the applicant submits that the applicant number two cannot be joined as number instead applicant number two is required to be required to be Mr Page four par four sorry transpose that person to defend Amendment leave to amend leave to amend Mr this is sitting transposed as respond number six is submitted thatan number one is claiming substantial really from The Honorable Court as as as per the provisions of the Gujarat ownership of Ls act andant number two is a beneficiary therefore he may be sub transposed and joined as respondant number six Mr Patel the Lear ADV appearing for respondent submits that if the respond number two is supporting the if the petitioners number two is supporting the petitioner number one under such circumstances the transposition as prayed for is not required the transposition may be permitted only if there is any conflict of interest between the applicants having heard the Learned Advocates appearance for the respective parties in the opinion of this qu it would be just and proper if the applicant number two is transposed as the respond number six in the petition considering the fact that the petition is filed by The Cooperative Society seeking peaceful and vacant Poss of flat number 10 upon one of the society so that the Redevelopment can be undertaken by the applicant number two developer poster the interest of just interest of Justice would be served if the applicant number two is transposed as respond number six with the petition prayers in view of the prayers as prayed for like the needful be done by the applicant here the reg any other further directions no will carry out we cannot enter carry out sure and notice he will noce my will yes respond number Mr P the Learned Advocate who GES the service for is number six last time I obje now you can take ready ready reference I make a one table regarding difference of the two apps H so I'm giving the yes the prary object is yes yes hello hello hello yes six of my return submission yes I'll make table regarding difference of the two Society register register under the different acts yes now first The Cooperative Housing Society register under provision section 9 of the Gujarat Cooperative societ act in flat ownership act Cooperative housings there must be a Cooperative housing service Society under flat owners not a Housing Society a Cooper housing service Society registered under provision of section 10 of the Gujarat owners flat act second in the Cooperative Housing Society register under section under act 1961 there are two types of the Housing Society I already arue argue on that point L yes that I'm conscious been as per section 10 of the Gujarat flat ownership act in case of the Cooperative Society registered under the Act of 1973 the promoters first purchase the land and construct the building and sell its own on ownership basis and after that the promoter shall within the prescribed period submit an application to the register for registration of the organization of the person who take the flats as a Cooperative Society or as Cas may be as a company and the promoter shall join in respect of the flat which have not been taken in such application for membership of a Cooperative Society or as case may now third not yes third point in case of Cooperative Housing Society is classified under section 12 of the Gujarat Cooperative societies act 1961 there must be a classification under section 12 of a Cooperative Society correct uh in that onip act there is no classification of the society now fourth there is no chapter of Cooperative Housing Society registered under the Act only the biologos is registered and the same is looking into the matters of the poerty Housing Society in flat ownership act the various section I already argued L last time yes you are right yes I remember so my respectful submission is that section 41 A is only in relation to the G society which registered under Section 10 of the black ownership act there is no definition of the Housing Society is given in the flat ownership act that's right so this is the preliminary cond preliminary objection first objection I have raised that my appeal is pending and I have already CED Judgment of the Supreme Court and the statutory tribal is there yes then you are the app I'm the and now Lord in latest what have you challenged what have you challenged in I have challenged that my possession cannot be taken I have already challenged that the Redevelopment discrimination of Redevelopment is challenged a both things are tell let us no now in latest lordship the lordship has given one judgment on 16th August 2024 so far as the alternative remed is concerned now here is section5 of the yes there 10 it is submitted by the respondent in this matter it it is I Mark marking yes it is open for the petitioner hearing to prefer revision application under section5 of the Cooperative societies act which is an alternative remedy correct it is submitted so here my case is that I have applied statutory remedy available under tribunal correct as a statutory appeal correct if this directly they came here without uh before the tribunal approach he has to approach the tribunal to decide the appeal as early as possible correct true but to file this petition directly corre so if this petition is entertain allowed huh then my rights statut right of appeal May beiz true and therefore I requesting lordship yes to give a direction to the tribunal yes to decide my appeal as early as possible with stipulated timeses so I have ra two point regarding preliminary objection it's requires to be allow right okay another another yes three judgment I have cited and I have narrated in my WR submission so I'm not taking more time okay it is on relation to that the court cannot add The Words which are not in the Statue and another judgments are there the all the other judgment is delivered by this court is are for incum looking to the section looking to The Cooperative societies act and looking to the flat ownership act the I have cited those Judgment of the Supreme Court also all those judgments are for including I'm I'm saying that in in those judgment judgment this different is not decided this is my sub okay the suit which is filed by the board of nominees huh is only for the purpose of getting four BK flat he has not challenged the development hode page 140 the finding of board of nominees one of the my Lord page 139 13 number six and honorable Cod this this judgment is before the division appeal before tribunal there is no stay granted my Lord question is my Lord now he says I am enti of for B FL suppose entire appeal is allowed tribunal then he get four bhk flate but he cannot stall the entire development today say 2020 these are this F round before this cour this cour they came before this cour faiv application I they fil they lost LP they lost the code director decide Board of nominees cour decided over favor there are t is pending today my Lord the project is of 2019 we to 24 my the cost of project now most of except him everybody has vacated we are paying rent to them my Lord we are recurring everyday expenses he's only not vacating then we are only vacating Everyday expenses suppose my tribunal decides then only he will get only entire four bhk only my he's not otherwise going to set aside the scheme therefore my Lord now L has taken number of I don't want to site because Lord taken a number of view in development considering Gujarat copy act redevelopment act redevelop the government has provided the mechanism for redevelopment of act it does not change the coper structure it does not change the rights also my Lord they may remain member but it is his contention that everything all the earlier judgments are for in now for he has to has to go for division divion confirm the lordship you my Lord that is therefore now cannot be taken by him my Lord he has to carry the matter the Supreme Court M therefore no no but there is a point which is taken yes find out my therefore what is his submission that Cooperative is classified in section 12 there is no classification in flat ownership m Housing Society only bylaw is registered to flat but why is that comparison I don't understand it not this a Cooper 61 but Redevelopment has been provided in the flat ownership act by government SE 41A so that those flight or 30 years old flight they can go Redevelopment and members will get new flight man and additional carpet area therefore there by Lots by passing the order the courts are not affecting the rights of members and 1961 act nor code is change structure of SC Society it as it is my Lord true the rights are not changed they get new flat my Lord everything they get and this is the M and M provided by government so that the person who cannot afford to have a new flat or renovate the flat by these way they get new that is and that is L one more Judgment of your lot yesterday I was reading has taken all this contention taken care of it par 11 par 17 1822 M that is all taken care of M paragraphs par 11 is 41A yes how we have considered the matter judgment exhaustive de all the issue my Lord much as we understand otherwise we would not pass an order which would be you Al confirm and in all these matters the petitions are filed by Cooperative Society yes yes wherein they are registered Cooperative soci yes yes yes Kamar you are also yes yeset that section 41 A is not withstanding anything in that yes therefore all every therefore not withstanding not missing anything my Lord that is why we consider this yes yes L section starting is not missing anything contained in this act any work in L to Redevelopment of a building can be carried out on such terms and condition as May prescribed after obtaining the consent of not less than 75% of the flat owner of such building yes provided respect such building a period of 25 years must have been completed from the date of issuance permission or for development by the concern Authority or the concern has decided such building is Lous condition or likely to fall or in any way dangerous to any person occupying restoring to passing by such structure or any other structure or place in the neighborhood thereof so L has and that is on lordship judgment par 11 Mal then honorable Court may have par 17 and 18 M yes yes yes it is also opposite so and so so and so having extensive LP judment Mal correct we have relied on the yes ratio laid down by honorable and Par 18 second LPA judgment Mal the contention of my the there is no provision gujatat foring sum so and so like provision contain housing so and so so and so so and that court is over the court has held that it is not an eviction in terms of transer yes it is not eviction it is temporary shifting yes from one place to other and after comple get facility a new new construction and 22 yes in light of the for the ratio has refer above is number 7 8 15 16 32 are the member society and lose their IND right to and dec of society for an accept through the the petition is compliant of the condition of section 41 of act in the facts of pres case the buildings are constructed in the year 85 this building is 1960 our building is 74 ining more than for 30 years or 36 the structure engine report so and so so and so and there is a consent of more than 7 98% has given consent only 99 1% left out Mal the OB chra chra Lear appear respond that Society has failed to follow process in has been SED without following process of law that is why I asked you to transpose yes that suppose if we find something yes yes and then immediately I accepted the honorable Court suggestion then honorable Court will find then 22.2 mil the OB by P 78 no longer res in light of judgment passing special 853 2019 and judgment so passing special wherein the pr made for by the petition are held to maintainable the Redevelopment is accepted conscent by more than 75% so this is my contention by the court in this judgment referred my then honorable Court par 22.3 this court has also con effect the while civil Su bearing number so and so filed by the number 12 and the another civil being in by is pending before the compu court is independent proceeding initiated by respond against the society for which the relment in the opin of this code cannot be stall in line in line with the ratio Ben I followed that ratio because the honorable division bench held that it can't and for the prayers that have prayed for he's right that if he is entitled to 4 bhk he should be allotted 4 BK that whatever outcome of judgment will find to us right that was my Lear query of this answer by the court in judgment par 2.3 my Lord that's all 41 page number 415 my prayer of the he saying that there you that the respond number four are paying for four BK there is nothing like this no no it was you may come to the prayers page 415 41 along with my the clear close of the laat shoot yes yes yes for as for Section 153 subsection six is the important of the guat coop Society section 153 subsection 6 15 subsection please read has provided in this act no appeal s like shall lie against any order decision or award passed in accordance with this act and every such order decision or a shall be final if appeal is not provided then become fin correct and where an appeal has been provided for any order passed on appeal shall be final and no further appeal shall lie against it so the appeal is file then the order of the appeal will be fil shall be filed so the word is sell it therefore my statut rights yes yes I we are not going I'm not inclined to overreach your statutory right because as you have prayed what have you prayed fortiv Society ROP [Music] and what what are the prayers in the present petition petition my want my POS one my C position yes Mr the pray are you are also seeking eviction of the respond number five he has not challenged and the prayers in the LA suit at page just before just to understand the prayers yes' what would be the effect of the order that would be passed by this boot no no he has to nothing he has to vate hand he is not losing right finding page 137 that very finding of nom FL for for D sing judment D sing judgment 85 no no that is one yes please continue he has not challeng resolution pass Society of Mr I'm I was also on the prayer at page 1415 415 matter yes yes honorable cour he has not challenged the resolution of society by which re development has been passed in AGM my Lord okay so that is not challenge my Lord is FL is player is see now before the board of five members were there yes now four has already walked out entered in Theo with h m 100 only one is left out yes now can this prer available to him in view of the section 41 capital A and Mr yes you may read so that it would be clear to the also section 41 A may be seen this 75% now it is here 99% Mar therefore therefore has to read the prayer SEC Provisions matter correct and now provision said there 75% scheme must go on therefore he he cannot challenge statute Mal statute challeng can statute cour therefore when 99% has already said and he has not challenged the very res de development societ agms he has will not find any kind see therefore this prayer has lordship can in spite of this honorable Court can allow the petition because the rights are not going to p is my statement record he will get the flat mord from today there tomorrow any day I ready for that then he would not have been before the court therefore the court has to pass and honorable Court one more contention huh page 412 yes yes now he has to corporate Society is is is is only by majority correct on page 412 last okay so no resolution has been challenged once again honorable code page 413 41at now North sending section 41 says North sending contain rights are not going and the scheme will go on Mal and one one more can one again honorable code page 409 what 409 par 7 yes supp I don't have 75% I cannot go it corre therefore first and foremost thing is 75% then only the development go and all these questions raised by him answered also consider that's sometimes we also have to recapitulate why my appeal will be succeed yes page 118 the order of the board of nomin there is a contradictory in order yes that you may argue before the app Forum yes say is pending yes I'm I'm what point not the app Authority yes page number 11 19 it is required to be SE what is the contradiction in the in the Judgment of the board of M yes yes but that you have in one side is saying that the board of M is that theat you are there before the before the yes I'm pointing out that yes yes it must be so I'm with you must my request is only there yes but I have yes only small in page number 119 the board of nominees is is in his J giving finding that that the flat ownership Act is not applicable in other findings they are relying upon the flat I'm reading on page you may read and you may ass it and you may submit before the Forum wherever the appeal is pending in accordance with law it will be decided Lord permit me only to read 11 19 not required because I not I'm not sitting in but that you will have to satisfy the Forum where theal is pending I'm not here that order is not challenged before me yes yes Mr Corporation who appears someone appear he appear my lords for the corporation yes a formal party my lords you are a formal party my lords you would be would be appearing Mr four for four none would appear no mam because now there is an S he has already entered delete my with my oral application my because he already V advate seeks permission to delete the response because he has already vacated from the permission entered is your petition I'm not con respond number five Mr by way of present petition the petitioner hearing the petitioner hearing is a registered Society Cooperative Society registered Under The Cooperative Society at 1961 right registration number 7024 dated 75978 is there are 96 Flags in the society which are known as bana Flags situated at Naran nagar vasna andad 7 the society has constructed Flats on land bearing SP number 319 of T scheme number 22 of ma vasana admeasuring Adas 687 square that is 5750 Square me petition Society it is the case of repetion of society extraordinary extraordinary general meeting was called pursuing the notice issued by the respondent AMC respondent number two under Section 264 of the Gujarat provincial Municipal Corporation monitor 49 because of the dialect be dated condition of the flags in the same extraordinary general meeting of the petion number one it was resolved that the society should be redeveloped instead of being instead of repairing of society being reped like the society sought for opinion from structural engineer mul Engineers private limited and have been given option on 277 2001 and prior that the chartered engineer visited the society in 47 2019 9721 very it is opine that the society is not safe looking into the condition of the structure the chartered engineer did not recommend to reside in the society and that there are chances of major casualty the forite report of the structural engineer is Duan sh dat 277 the same resolution when the resolution was finalized by the petitioner number one Society on 26122 in the annual general meeting petitioner number one passed the resolution and the objectives names were also mentioned in the sage resolution the S resolution was passed or Redevelopment was passed by 34 majority and approval for to the proposal of the petition proposal approval of M suum developers was reiterated as the developer the development agreement is executed with the developer and the society the petitioner and the respondent developer prepar which is executed between the members of the society aristoc in the course of hearing it is submitted 9 Mr ra the Learned Advocate appearing for the r on instruction submits that out of 96 members 95 members have consented for the development the list sh the members of the society and the status of execution of by individual members is really produced at submitted that the the submitted that six members of the petitioner Society including the respond numbers four and respond number four approach the board of nominees by filing laat 165 of 2020 in the state suit 2020 which came to be rejected by order 6 to 2022 17 and exra safe judgment pass by the the subject matter of appeal being 59 of 22 bye only the respond number four which is spending here the respond number six entered into registered development agreement 29322 which is registered with the office of sub register and by registration number 537 very the respond number six has PA 57 36,000 stand it is the case of the sitution is that because of the objections Leed by the respondents four and five by not entering into with the petitioner number one and no respond the six he address the legal notice with the respond numbers and on 18 re the notice not the enter into in view of the the petitioner hearing is constra to approach this seeking the followings mainly on the ground under the provisions of the Gujarat ownership flat the consent of 75 members is necessary for the development in the facts of the present out of 96 clat holders 95 flat holders have entered into with the petitioner for th there is a consent of more than 75 M 6% members in the facts of pres place the building in question is also more than 41 admitted is more than 25 years old in the facts of the present building what is what what is the age of the building Mr 35 years old man 35 and is in di Mr the Learned Advocate appearing for the applicant the submit the petitioner has upon issue notice issued by respond number two am held a meeting of the petitioner here it was resolved to go for redevelopment of the plat in rather than going for repairing of the building it's in light of the in the anual general meeting it was resolved to app point the respond number six say for redevelopment it is submitted that it is not in dispute that out of so and so so and so have consented the building is more than 35 old that Reliance is placed on of the structural engineer which is dly the exure page 35 page which is dated 277 2009 very the associate report M of the structural engineer Rems that residing in the S premises is dangerous for human being and that there are chances of casuality placing Reliance of the fil it is sub interest it is in the interest that development Carri Mr KES P the Learned Advocate appearing for the respond F submits that the the laak suit is filed by the respond number four he the respond I don't whether he is the author of The laat no he not the only four has approached total five approach five out of five is filed by only only my resp number respond number five that is why I'm asking you the appeal is filed by the respond number five here only number but four you have delet you have no sorry number five five I said number five have delet five you have deleted five five deleted four appeal is filed the respond number four hearing challenging God passed by the board of Nom rejecting being so which is submitted that the parties be relegated to the competent Authority where the appeal is pending wherein the respondent hearing has read that the page 415 165 of 2020 page 415 paragraph 16 that the responding [Music] Authority revelop revelop submitted in light of the when a statutory remedy is available the parties are required to be Rel Reliance is also based on the provisions of the flat ownership Act and the Cooperative societies act and it is submitted that the present submitted that submitted looking at the Gujarat flat ownerships act 19733 do not Prevail over the Gujarat Cooperative societies act 1961 it is submitted that the S is submitted that the Gujarat ownership flat Act 1973 does not apply to the house in society registered under the Gujarat Cooperative societies act it is submitted that the Ling Reliance on the foret submissions it is submitted that the has prayed for in the present petition may not be granted in rejoin of Mr ra The leared Advocate appearing for the petitioner hearing submits that once the society resolves to go for redevelopment the individual member who loses his right to challenge the redevelop it is submitted it is reiterated that except the respondent hearing all the members have consented to Redevelopment it is submitted that the process of Redevelopment is not in the nature of eviction as held by The Honorable division Bank 1427 of 2023 St it is a temporary it is for a temporary period of time that the members are required to evct the premises but it is not in terms of the definition of the transfer of property in light of the proed it is submitted that the opposite contention raised by the Learned Advocate appearing for the respond is such that the same may not be considered having considered the submissions Advanced by the Learned Advocates of hearing for the respective parties it emerges that the petitioner hearing is a society Cooperative Society registered under the Gujarat Cooperative society's act 1961 registration number 7024 dated 45 1972 out of the 96 Flags the members of 95 flags have consented for the Redevelopment of the society in the decision taken by the society in the annual general meeting they did so and so the fored decision was arrived at by the petitioner Society upon issuance of notice by the respond number two under Section 268 of the 264 of the gpmc 1949 because the condition of the Society of the flats of the society is in diated condition there it was resoled by the society to go for redevelopment rather than repairing this court has produced the report by the structural engineer which is duly produced at anure F page 37 35 page 35 very upon perusal of the report of the structural engineer dated 277 2019 it is the it is certified that the chartered engineer chartered engine licensed by the AMC by license number SD 0598 21923 that the condition of the building SE is dangerous and is such that there are chances of major casualty in the inspection it is observed that the cver portion of the structure comma balcony slabs are in DET deteriorated condition the slabs are falling and dangerous for living in the pr premises cses from W and sing are all in the blocks of the society upon perusal of the SE then the uh the in the members of the society and the respondent number six entered into an on so and so dat page 59 page 44 peral of the S it Emer the for is You by Page 59 88 members of the suicide in the course of hearing this qu is informed that as referred above out of 96 members 95 have consented only one number has not con it appears that six of the non-consent members SL objectives refer on laat before the leared mod of Nam which was what was the subject matter of SCA they challenge the exhibit the entry model entry model granted by of challeng of The Honorable Court the entry model by status quo was granted by the Learners Board of nor was challenged by referring SC 12958 of 2021 and 12959 2021 by one of the members all six all that was I they granted expert of I come before the high court high direct go Board of nominees the board of nominees granted stay a tribunal has vac the Tribunal P 6 they challeng this on the that was Ved by the was subject matter of challenge by before this P that is at anex J right page 62 yes P 62 very by the by order dated 14 and 21 the bo Board of Nomine was directed to consider the at the time heing the view of this page 78 P 7 26 the oppos was subject of challenge before the division by way of LPA 12022 whereby by 8 to2 the appeals were dismissed in light of the proceed Undisputed facts that emerg for the consideration of this C it is opposite to refer to section 41A of the ACT which reads this section 41 A provides that not withstanding anything contained in that any work in relation to Redevelopment of a building can be carried out upon such terms and conditions as may be prescribed after obtaining consent of less than 75 not less than 75% of the flat owners of such building will St provid Ed that such building once a period of 25 years must have been completed from the date of issuance of permission of De for development by the concerned Authority or the concerned Authority has declared such building in ruinous condition or likely to fall the expression in the facts of the present case and in the facts of the present this the out of 96 members 95 members have consented and signed a mo and a development agreement is also entered into between the petitioner and the respond number six on so and so the report of structural engineer dat that so and so is dy produced at stating that the buildings are in dilapitated and dangerous condition the building at the flats in the flats of the present case are more than 25 years old that is 35 year old St upon in light of the opposite the develop the is entered into between numers and this SP number six the development agreement is also produced at page 267 which is produced by this the sa is entered into upon certain terms and conditions which are dly produced which are produced produced at page 271 79 the is registered before them regist sub regist office of sub regist by registration number 53327 the state is being produced at page 292 upon perusal of the proceed further only one member is objecting to the Redevelopment that is resolved by the responding Society once the society resolves to redevelop the single member of the society loses the right to object in the foret that's this deems it fit to ra refer to the ratio L by the division bench in so and in letters P appe 1547 of 20 23 paragra [Music] Supreme civil appeal number civil SLP civil number 506 of 2020 very 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 considering the foret position of love this quot and for the reason are stated above at the cost of reputation it is required to be observed that the building in question is in a dilapidated condition the structural engineers report states that the Ford would result in major casualty the in the opinion of this for an objection raised by one member the Redevelopment cannot be should not be sted the honorable division lch in letters f up b527 of 23 by order dated 181223 has extensively explained the procedure of the Redevelopment under rule 19-25 in paragraph 10 wherein in the S order The Honorable division bench has held that it is only at the stage ofou between the petitioner where the and note in the facts of the present case the parties have also entered into a development agreement and the agreement is also ear registered before the office of the Sub sub regist and in view there the parties are bound would be bound by the conditions stipulated in the sa development agreement if if any of the if any of the flat owner is aggrieved by any of the condition which is not properly Incorporated it is always open for such party to participate in the process of development in a constructive way job in light of the oppos discussion and considering and in light of the ratio as referred upon the prayers as prayed for in the present petition are required to be allowed stop the objection raised by um require to be allow the prayers has prayed for the laad of the appeal proceedings which are pending before the appell at court are independent proceedings against the society with respect to allotment under the Redevelopment process the Redevelopment cannot be stoed for an appeal which is pending for the appet Forum at the instance of one flat only St for the forgoing reasons the respondant number five to vacate the flat and hand over the possession peaceful and vacant possession of for there for the Redevelopment under as per section 41A of the Gujarat ownership Flats Amendment act 2018 within a period of 12 weeks from the receipt of this order and cooperate in the Redevelopment of the petitioner Society with the foregoing reasons the present petition is exercise allowed to the a fored extent exercising extraordinary jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution CH okay all right anything I met with an accident in the morning therefore I was late no difficult The Possession is to go on first L may have page 28 for a moment yes this is filed directly due to positive of time because till 27 the Learned presiding officer of The Honorable DRT was not available and only on 23rd of August by way of rpad received the notice despite the order under section 14 is that within 90 days the proceedings are required to be completed but 28 is the urgency page 28 if lotes May kindly have for a moment yes this is the communication of the Court commissioner and The Honorable Court would find the date of taking over The Possession on page 30 in the second line 1924 yes what is the date of the notice under section 134 date of I'm sorry notice under section 134 was issued by uh in a moment lotes will find the details on page 4 three par 3.2 you may give the data the 23rd of April uh 234 2024 was the date whereby notice under Section 32 was is 13 subsection 2 was issued 132 then 134 was issued on 3rd of July 24 3724 they moved an application under section 14 on 9724 and the impune order was passed by the concern code on 30th of July 24 that lotes will find on page 14 application as well as order 30th of July yes page 18 is the impune order lotes would find on the top at what page is your application essay I have yet not moved for the reason that this after this order of 30th of July the communication which is annexed at page 28 as was issued by the Learned code commissioner was received on 23rd of August just before a week by way of an rpad correct now from 14th 14th August is the date of communication from 14 to 22 we were in contact with the bank and the branch manager and we we had mutually agreed for an amount of 18 lakhs towards outstanding dues of total 28 lakhs yes but in the interum period this notice has come and the notice says that the possession would be taken over on this Sunday Day After Tomorrow therefore due to absence of the presiding officer as well and because of the posi of Time Lord I have moved directly just to see that I may not be rendered homeless we are ready to deposit I have taken sense bles may consider presently the request for deposit of 20% of the amount you I'm simply adjourning it to Tuesday you may file an application before the Trib but my possession would go on Sunday on first but it would be extremely difficult because before eight or nine days it does not come up on board even though urgent notes are being filed there therefore I have stated so in the on oath that I would be rendered homeless and everything would go right I understand every there also as your lot are aware generally honorable DRT are directing deposit I would be aware only if you would approach the competent Forum but I would have certainly I know the remedy but because of the non ail of the this it is up to you okay if L consider deposit of the amount if that could be done not done because their directions not the and I'm not inclin yes item 11 19 which was heard for some time that subor matter can it be kep next Friday yes because I I believe on that day the agps were not there were the regular agps were not there so instruction okay it can continue on next Friday 23 huh 9th maybe kept on 9th not 23 because our matter is also coming on n9th absolutely connected fine I agree even if I agree but I'm only saying that I think it is connected but very well you are saying it's not connected just take one one minute my memory I don't know may take 23 in 23 I am seeking an order that election of the chairman and vice chairman be deed correct GP was my friend's matter is that he has Challen nomination in one SE even if once even if his petition is allowed chairman election has to be held that person will be replaced by somebody else but how how my election can be stay or delayed because of a petition where one seat is an issue there are judgments of our court that even if the election is set aside some if this matter was Kept For Your instr I will be able to substantiate that just they are just trying to delete they saying they not concerned but whatever I I I will so the earliest second earliest will be second s days not if Mr says s Days Make a Difference not very well then second other if seven days don't make a difference not request is n because my matter is coming up on no difficulty Mr M your in my nomin must but nomination nomination of one nomination of Mr the election he's an elected person those who are elected they they are seeking election of chairman and vice chairman for which then you may not take any action I told you earlier also no steps be taken so if you want I may say so no this because rights I need to hear everyone and then because it it may not be said on that day that the matter is infructuous I will revive it but can it be Monday only Monday Mr how you are aware all those Cooperative matters I have this was a Cooperative this is cooperative Society Monday okay Monday L sorry my mistake I thought that banking I make mistakes no no l taking too much SP not for that you should never at the end of the day you should on serial number five on Tuesday matter I remember but I could not take up today I'm listing it on Monday I'm inclined to pass the on please my Lord please nonetheless I don't require anyone's