IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
N.V. Anjaria, J.
Manilal Devjibhai Solanki - Appellant
Vs.
State of Gujarat and Ors. - Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 14500 of 2010
Decided On : 09-10-2017
N.V. Anjaria, J.
1. By filing the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed to direct the respondent authorities to vary the Town Planning Scheme No. 28 (Althan Bhatar - Surat) under Section 70 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 on the ground that the scheme suffers, in respect of treating the land of the petitioner, from error and irregularity as the original plot area of land belonging to the petitioner is 9904 sq. mtrs., whereas what is considered in the scheme is 8804 sq.mtrs. It prayed to allot the corresponding plot to the petitioner and it is further prayed to set aside Town Planning Scheme qua the land of the petitioner.
2. The petitioner is the owner and occupier of original land bearing survey No. 28 (28/1, 28/2+3 and 28/4 as well as block No. 33) admeasuring total 9904 sq. mtrs. Under the Town Planning Scheme, final plot No. 131 appears to have been allotted to the petitioner.
3. The Surat Municipal Corporation in exercise of powers conferred under Section 41(1) of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (herein after referred to as "Town Planning Act" for the sake of brevity) declared an intention to make Draft Town Planning Scheme (Surat) No. 28 ((Althan Bhatar - Surat) by Resolution dated 06th June, 1995. The declaration was published in the two daily newspapers on 22nd June, 1995. A meeting of the owners of the lands affected in the scheme was held on 02nd April, 1996. The Draft Planning Scheme was prepared in exercise of powers under section 42(1) of the Town Planning Act and the same was published in the official gazette on 08th November, 1996. The objections and suggestions were invited by publication in the newspaper. On 22nd July, 1997, the Town Planning Committee submitted Draft Scheme to the State Government for sanction under Section 48 of the Act. The State Government sanctioned the scheme on 30th July, 1998. By notification dated 17th September, 1998, the Town Planning Officer was appointed. Thereafter, the preliminary scheme under Section 52(1) was declared on 20th June, 2009, which was submitted to the State Government for sanction. The preliminary scheme came to be sanctioned on 12th July, 2010.
3.1 It is the case of the petitioner that in the process of preparing the Town Planning Scheme, notice was issued to the petitioner by the Town Planning Officer. In response thereto, the petitioner filed representation dated 05th September, 1996 pointing out that the measurement of the original plot of the petitioner was wrongly shown as 8904 sq. mtrs. in Form F. It was pointed out that the correct measurement was 9904 sq. mtrs. Along with the said representation, copies of the documents, such as 7/12 and others showing the correct area were submitted. The same was not considered, pleads the petitioner.
3.2 At the said stage, the petitioner had an occasion to file before this Court Special Civil Application No. 9396 of 2009. The said petition came to be disposed of on 07th December, 2009. While passing the order, the Court observed that it was pointed out from the affidavit-in-reply of the respondent that Town Planning Scheme No. 28 was yet to be finalized by the State Government under Section 65 of the Act. The Court treated the petition as premature and on that count, did not grant any relief, but permitted the petitioner to submit objections before the State Government and further directed that such objections shall be considered on merits.
3.3 Pursuant to the order of this Court as above, the petitioner submitted his representation dated 10th March, 2010 to the Principal Secretary, Urban Development and Urban Housing Department by annexing therewith the documents in support of the case that the actual land area was 9904 sq. mtrs., and that instead the same was treated as 8904 sq. mtrs., that is, lesser by 1000 sq.mtrs. complaining and that accordingly, the petitioner was allotted proportionately smaller final plot. Th
Kashiben WD/o. Pitamber Devchand and anr. v. State of Gujarat
Shilpa Park Co. Op. Housing Society Ltd. v. Surat Urban Development Authority
Jethabhai Mepabhai Makwana v. State of Gujarat
Kanjibhai Dahyabhai Malsattar v. State of Gujarat
Chhaganbhai Motibha Bhoi v. Anand Area Development Authority
Mukundlal Trikamlal Patva vs. State of Gujarat [2007 (1) GLR 761]
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.