Point of Law: Authority under the Act of 1976 exercises a quasi-judicial power which implies observing of the principles of natural justice and to conclude that the occupants are not entitled to occupy the plots. In the present case, it is not even the case of the petitioner that he has not been offered any opportunity of hearing. On the contrary, the Corporation, after considering the response of the petitioner and in-depth consideration, has passed order dated 26.04.2017. Evidently, the petitioner has not been able to point out as to how the said order is erroneous.

JUDGMENT :

SANGEETA K. VISHEN, J.

1. By this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 26.04.2017 passed by the respondent no. 2-Corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Corporation’).

2. The facts are to the following effect:

2.1 According to the petitioner, the petitioner and his family members are in occupation and possession of land bearing revenue survey no. 3/2 admeasuring 5160 square meters situated at Village Bodakdev, Taluka Daskroi, District Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘the land in question’). Father of the petitioner, namely, Prahladji Manaji Thakor, executed a sale deed dated 03.01.2006 in favour of Pursottam Ramani a non-agriculturist and according to the petitioner, the said sale deed, was not genuine. Also, the petitioner had undivided share in the land in question and by misrepresentation and fraud, the said sale deed has been executed. Thereafter, Purshottam Ramani executed another sale deed dated 10.09.2008 in favour of Gala Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The petitioners since aggrieved, filed a Special Civil Suit No. 461 of 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the Suit”) challenging the sale deed dated 10.09.2008 executed by Pursottam Ramani in favour of Gala Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd.

2.2 The Corporation has introduced Town Planning Scheme no. 50 (Bodakdev) (hereinafter referred to as “the T.P. Scheme”) and by virtue of the said T.P. Scheme, deduction was effected in the land in question. The petitioner has received notices from the Corporation inviting objections under the provisions of Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act of 1976”) and have accordingly lodged his objections on 27.12.2016 pointing out that the petitioner and his family members are in possession of the land in question, paying regular taxes etc. It was also brought to the notice of the Corporation that the Suit is also pending and it was urged that since the petitioner and his family members are residing over it, the possession of the land may not be taken.

2.3 The Corporation by passing the order dated 26.4.2017, rejected the objections of the petitioner on the ground that the revenue survey no. 3/2, has already been allotted final plot no. 9 and as per the provisions of clause (b) of Section 67 of the Act of 1976, all the rights in the original plots which have been reconstituted in final plots, have ceased and the same shall be subject to the rights settled by the Town Planning Officer. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has filed captioned writ petition.

3. The Corporation, upon issuance of the notice, has filed replies. It has been stated that after following the due procedure under the Act of 1976, the T.P. Scheme has been sanctioned by the State Government vide notification dated 19.12.2011 and the same has already come into force. It further states that for the land bearing survey no. 3/2 owners have been allotted plot no. 9. It is the case of the Corporation that the land in question, has been reserved for sale for residential (final plot no. 357) and small part in final plot no. 354 for the Socially and Economically Weaker Sections Housing. Further, the town planning road having width of 18 meters and 12 meters have been carved out from the part of the land in question.

3.1 It has been further stated that upon sanctioning of the T.P. Scheme and by virtue of the provisions of the Act of 1976, it has already come into force and therefore, the land in question would vest with the appropriate authority for public purpose. Accordingly, notice dated 16.04.2014 came to be issued under the provisions of Sections 67 and 68 of the Act of 1976 read with rule 33 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Rules, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rules’) which was duly served upon the petitioner on 25.11.2016. It has also been stated that the authority concerned is obligated to implement the T.P. Scheme and therefore, for removing the encroachment