( 1 ) THESE two petitions by two different sets of petitioners but against the common respondent namely the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority constituted under the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act 1976 and the common respondent no. 2-the State of Gujarat raise common questions of law in the context or background of similar facts and they can be conveniently taken up together and disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) A few facts required to be noted in order to understand what the controversy is in these two petitions. The first two petitioners of the first petition no. 3459 of 1980 contended that certain lands set out in paragraph 2 of that petition belonged to them. Out of the land S. Nos. 44 45 and 46-P admeasuring 11155 sq. yds of land belonged to the petitioner no. 1 as the Karta of the Hindu Undivided Family and the land of S. No. 47-P and S. No. 53 admeasuring in all 40937 sq. yds. belongs to the petitioner no. 1 in his personal capacity. The petitioner no. 2 in that petition is the constituted attorney of the petitioner no. 1 for the purpose of of submitting a Scheme under secs. 20 and 21 of the said Act and for doing all incidental thi