Patel Rameshbhai Bapudas vs. The Competent Authority, Kandla-Gorakhpur Lpg Pipeline Project
AI Summary
Get an AI-powered analysis of this court order
Order Issued After Hearing
Purpose:
Not Reached / Adjourned
Before:
Hon'ble Dipankar Datta, Hon'ble Manmohan
Stage:
AFTER NOTICE (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES
Remarks:
Dismissed
Listed On:
30 Apr 2025
In:
Judge
Category:
UNKNOWN
Interlocutory Applications:
72411/2022,72412/2022,
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
COURT NO.14
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
<u>Petition(s)</u> for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 8961/2022
[Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 11-02-2022 in SCA No. 2148/2022 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad]
PATEL RAMESHBHAI BAPUDAS & ORS.
VERSUS
THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY, KANDLA-GORAKHPUR LPG PIPELINE PROJECT & ORS.
(WITH FOR ADMISSION and I.R., IA No.72411/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No.72412/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T., IA No. 72411/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND IA No. 72412/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING $O.T.$ )
$\mathbf{1}$
Date : 30-04-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
| For Petitioner(s): Mr. Abhimanue Shrestha, AOR<br>Ms. Sridevi Panikkar, Adv.<br>Mr. Pritesh Patni, Adv. | |
|---|---|
| For Respondent(s) :Mr. Vikramjit Banerjee, A.S.G.<br>Mr. Bharat Singh, Adv.<br>Mr. Padmesh Mishra, Adv.<br>Mr. Anukalp Jain, Adv.<br>Mr. Shantanu Sharma, Adv.<br>Mr. Rajeshwari Shankar, Adv.<br>Dr. N. Visakamurthy, AOR | |
| Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, AOR | |
| Mr. Raghavendra P. Shankar, A.S.G.<br>Mrs. Priya Puri, AOR<br>Ms. Pallavi Mishra, Adv.<br>Mr. Neelabh Bisht, Adv.<br>Mr. Sachin Dubey, Adv. | |
| Signature Not Verified<br>Digitally signed by<br>NITIN TALREJA<br>17:00:10 IST<br>Reason: | Ms. Parul Sharma, Adv.<br>Ms. Ritim Mangla, Adv.<br>Mr. Vibhav Srivastava, Adv.<br>Mr. Sharad Kumar Puri, Adv. |
Petitioner(s)
Respondent(s)
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
-
It is the admitted factual position that there is no pleading in the writ petition to the effect that the incumbent Prant Officer/Assistant Collector, who discharged the duty of "competent authority" act on the relevant enactment, is not a person having a trained legal mind, we see no reason to hold that appointment of such an incumbent is contrary to the law declared by this Court in the decision in Laljibhai Kadvabhai Savaliya & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Ors., (2016) 9 SCC 791. The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
-
We clarify that if the petitioners are aggrieved by the quantum of compensation awarded by the competent authority and if an avenue of appeal is still open to them, they may pursue such remedy in accordance with law.
-
Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(NITIN TALREJA) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA) ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)