IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Abhilasha Kumari, J.
Vijay Vallabhbhai Patel and Ors. - Appellants
Vs.
State of Gujarat and Ors. - Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 1631 of 2015
Decided On: 10.04.2015
Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 300A - Petitioners have, interalia, prayed for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, quashing and setting aside decision taken by the respondent authorities in seeking to put up the construction of the retaining wall/embankment, behind the subject land belonging to the petitioners and not along the periphery of the river boundary, on the right bank of the river Tapi, starting from Nehru Bridge to Magdalla Bridge in District Surat, as being arbitrary, malafide, irrational, unjustified and without any basis, in addition to being violative petitioners have further prayed for directions to the respondent authorities to reconsider the alignment of the retaining wall/embankment on the basis of the river boundary demarcated in the report submitted prepared pursuant to the meeting -Held, action of respondent No.3 in proposing to construct the retaining wall in a manner that sandwiches the land of the petitioners between the wall and the right bank of the river Tapi, thereby exposing it to floods and rendering it useless, results in depriving the petitioners of the use of their property without authority of law, in violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India. Due to the constant danger of floods, the petitioners would be unable to make any construction upon the said land or put it to any lucrative use by selling it or carrying on any trade, business or occupation thereupon. This would amount to the violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It is not denied that in a similar situation that arose in the year 1972 when an embankment was sought to be constructed, lands of persons who were similarly situated as the petitioners, were acquired by respondent No.3 and compensation was paid to them. Similar treatment is not being meted out to the petitioners, resulting in discrimination, which offends the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.- Petition allowed.
Abhilasha Kumari, J.
1. Rule. Ms. Vacha Desai, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for respondents Nos. 1, 3 and 5 and Mr. Dhaval G. Nanavati, learned advocate, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No. 4.
2. By way of the present petition preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have, inter-alia, prayed for the issuance of a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or direction, quashing and setting aside the decision taken by the respondent authorities in seeking to put up the construction of the retaining wall/embankment, behind the subject land belonging to the petitioners and not along the periphery of the river boundary, on the right bank of the river Tapi, starting from Nehru Bridge to Magdalla Bridge in District Surat, as being arbitrary, malafide, irrational, unjustified and without any basis, in addition to being violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, 48A and 300-A of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have further prayed for directions to the respondent authorities to reconsider the alignment of the retaining wall/embankment on the basis of the river boundary demarcated in the report submitted on 04.07.2013, prepared pursuant to the meeting held on 13.03.2009.
3. Respondent No. 1 is the Secretary, Narmada and Water Resources Supply and Kalpsar Department, State of Gujarat. Respondent No. 2 is the Secretary, Roads and Buildings Department, State of Gujarat. Respondent No. 3 is the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Department, which is contemplating the construction of the retaining wall/embankment in question, behind the subject land belonging to the petitioners, towards the city of Surat. Respondent No. 4 is the Surat Municipal Corporation and respondent No. 5 is the Narmada Water Resources Water Supply and Kalpsar Department, which has issued the tender in question.
4. The factual matrix, necessary background and the issues arising in the petition are briefly summarised as under:
4.1 Land bearing Revenue Survey Nos. 602, 686, 687 and 688 (admeasuring 3 Hectare, 89 Are and 51 sq. meters) of Village Adajan, Taluka Choryasi, District Surat (“the subject land” for short) is agricultural land situated adjacent to the right bank of the river Tapi in Surat. It falls under the Recreation Zone in the Town Planning Scheme Nos. 10 and 11 of Adajan, in terms of the provisions of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act (“the T.P. Act” for short). The subject land was in the joint name of the petitioners and one Jairambhai and Gauriben Jairambhai, who are the deceased parents of the present petitioner No. 2. The subject land is, therefore, of the private ownership of the petitioners.
4.2 The Tapi river flows through the city of Surat, cutting it into two parts. Over a period of time spanning more than fifty years, the city of Surat has expanded in length and breadth, which has led to people making the river bank, as well as the lands adjacent to the river Tapi, as their home. The entire city of Surat has, in fact, expanded more or less along the banks of the river Tapi. There have been occasions in the past when, due to excessive water in the river Tapi during the monsoon season, flooding has occurred in Surat, endangering life and property. A situation occurred in the year 1968, when, due to incessant rain in the catchment area of the river Tapi, a natural calamity occurred, resulting in flood waters entering the city of Surat. This situation prompted the authorities to consider alternatives to stop the flooding in the city in order to avoid such natural calamities.
4.3 In the year 1972, respondent No. 3 - Irrigation Department, had constructed an embankment of around 3 kms. covering an area commonly known as Rander, in Surat city, which was located on the right bank of the river Tapi. Some construction was carried out at another part of the river bank, in an area known as Bhatpore (Icchapore), which is at a distance of 12 to 15 Kms
Lachhman Dass Vs. Jagat Ram and others reported in (2007) 10 SCC 448;
Tukaram Kana Joshi and others Vs. Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and others
Dev Sharan and others Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and others
Chairman, Indore Vikas Pradhikaran Vs. Pure Industrial Coke and Chemicals Ltd. and others
K.T. Plantation Private Limited and another Vs. State of Karnataka
State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Narmada Bachao Andolan and another
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.