ORDER :

1. The present petition is filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by challenging the impugned action of the respondent Authority by carving out Final Plot No.19 and Final Plot No.21 in Town Planning Scheme No.3 of Odhav – Ahmedabad, whereby the right of the present petitioners is said to be jeopardised.

2. Heard Mr. B.J. Trivedi, learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr.Deep D. Vyas, learned advocate for the Corporation and Ms.Jyoti Bhatt, learned advocate for the State Authorities.

3.1 Mr.Trivedi, learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are claiming either the original plot, which was their or the alternate plot, which was allotted to them, as per the said Town Planning Scheme.

3.2 He has submitted that the petitioners are inherited the land in question from one Meenaben, widow of Sankalchand Lallubhai by way of a registered Will No.10507 dated 16.12.1991. Said Meenaben expired on 21.03.1993. The beneficiaries of the said registered Will i.e. the petitioners got a probate in their names.

3.3 He has submitted that the draft T.P.Scheme No.3 (Odhav) was declared on 17.12.1976.

3.4 He has submitted that for giving them the very same plot would require alteration and modification of the said Town Planning Scheme, the very same plot was sought, as there was existing structures i.e. the said alternate plot was already occupied and the respondent had to give the vacant plot in alternate.

3.5 He has submitted that the respondent authority was supposed to hand over the allotted plot to the petitioners. He has submitted that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question since many years, which is undisputed fact. However, after being served with the notice by the authorities, the petitioners approached this Hon'ble Court and the said notices were stayed and therefore, for giving effect to the orders, whereby the petitioner was ordered to be put in possession of the allotted plot, has not been put in actual possession of the said allotted plot, as there is encroachment upon the said land.

3.6 The encroachers have also filed petitioners before this Court, who have no legal title of the land in question. Therefore, all the said matters were tagged. However, except the petitioners, no other petitioners of any other tagged petitions have been able to show any legal title in any of their respective petitions and merely on the basis of the interim relief in their favour, the present petitioners are made to suffer and therefore, all the matters were got tagged, so that the rightful title holder can get the possession of the plot, which is required to be handed to them.

3.7 He has submitted that the revenue entry No.8624, dated 17-10-2017, which is placed with the Written Submissions, together with entries Nos.5625, dated 01-10-2007, No.5908 dated 03-10-2008, No.6003, dated 12-11-2008, No.6353, dated 08-04-2010, No.7071, dated 03-05-212 and No.8506 dated 02-05-2017 filed by the petitioners of SCAs No. 14469 to 14476 of 2016 are crystal clear and later on, vide the final Entry No.8624 dated 17-10-2017, it has been noted as to who are the beneficiaries of the said Will / probate certificate which was granted by the competent Civil Court.

3.8 He has also submitted that when this Hon'ble Court passed the orders, dated 05.08.2016, 24.08.2016 and 07.09.2016, the respondent No.2 never raised any such issues and readily agreed to get the land vacated and it is only now, at the time of final hearing, that such frivolous plea is raised, without any reason or rhyme. Thus, he has submitted that the present petition deserves to be allowed with compensatory costs and the petitioners be handed over the possession, as per the said T.P.Scheme allotment, wherein, it was decided to allot Final Plot No.19 to the petitioners against their land of Survey No. 93/4, which is being given Final Plot No. 21.

3.9 He has further submitted that on 21.07.2003, the Estate Department prepared a note for p