Nilesh Ramji Bhasra And ANR v. The Administrator Dadra And Nagar Haveli And And Diu And ORS

903-wp 5823-25.doc Digitally signed by PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Date:

2025.05.03 11:49:23 +0530 PRAJAKTA SAGAR VARTAK Prajakta Vartak

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5823 OF 2025 Nilesh Ramji Bhasra & Anr.

...Petitioners

Vs.

The Administration Dadra and Nagar Haveli and Daman and Diu & Ors.

...Respondents

__________ Ms. Prabha Badadare for Petitioners.

Mr. H. S. Venegaonkar with Mr. Harsh Dedhia for Respondents. __________ CORAM :

G. S. KULKARNI & ADVAIT M. SETHNA, JJ.

DATE :

30 APRIL 2025.

P.C.:

1.

Considering the urgency as stated, we have granted circulation for today. The grievance of the petitioner is of illegal demolition of the petitioners' house. 2.

After intimating the respondents of the listing of the present proceedings, Mr. Venegaonkar, learned counsel has appeared for the respondents-UT Administration. He submits that the petitioners' father Ramji Bhasra was issued a notice in respect of the very same property that the construction which is put up on the said property was unauthorized. It is stated that Ramji Bhasra has also filed Special Civil Suit No. 18 of 2025 before the Civil Court at Silvassa. There are some orders which are passed by the Civil Court. Although the house property which is demolished and which is subject matter of the special civil suit, was under the same survey number. This writ petition appears to have some 30 April 2025

903-wp 5823-25.doc averments in that regard, however, we find no description of the property which was demolished, namely, the measurement etc., either in the documents which are annexed to the petition or in the averments as made in the memo of the petition. This more particularly as it is being urged on behalf of the respondent/ UT Administration that the whole structure in question was unauthorized and an appropriate notice in that regard was issued in February 2025 and thereafter action of demolition of the unauthorized construction was undertaken. 3.

Being confronted with all the documents as annexed to the petition which are vague and do not describe the property in an appropriate manner i.e. measurement of the said property is not available, Ms. Badadare, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks leave to amend this petition. Let the amendment be carried out within one week from today. Copy of the amended petition be served on the respondents. Reply affidavit to the petition be filed by 09 June 2025. 4.

List the proceedings immediately after the reopening i.e. on 11 June 2025 (H.O.B.).

5.

In the event of any urgency, liberty to the petitioners to move the Vacation Court.

[ADVAIT M. SETHNA, J.] [G. S. KULKARNI, J.] 30 April 2025