JUDGMENT :

A.J. DESAI, J.

1. The issue involved in these two appeals is as to “whether a Notification issued by the Governor only under Article 243 P(d) (Chapter IX A) of the Constitution of India requires any procedure to be followed as provided under Article 243 Q of the Constitution of India?”

2. The parties have appeared through their advocates and with their consent, the appeals have been finally decided.

3. ADMIT. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of admission on behalf of respondent Nos.1, 3 to 5 and Ms. Dimple A. Thaker, learned advocate waives service of admission for respondent No. 2 in both the appeals.

4. The short facts arise from the record are as under.

5. That the appellants, namely, Bhamaiya (West) Gram Panchayat and Vavdi Buzarg Gram Panchayat challenged Notification dated 13.8.2015 issued by the Urban Development and Urban Housing Department, Government of Gujarat exercising its powers conferred by Clause (d) of Article 243P by which it notified several areas shown in the Schedule annexed thereto as the areas of municipal areas of Godhra Municipality and further declared that those areas shall form the part of Godhra Municipality which also included areas of Bhamaiya (West) Gram Panchayat and Vavdi Buzarg Gram Panchayat in Godhra Municipality.

6. Being aggrieved with the said Notification, Bhamaiya (West) Gram Panchayat and Vavdi Buzarg Gram Panchayat have preferred two writ petitions challenging the said Notification on several grounds. Learned Single Judge while admitting the said petitions stayed the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned Notification. The Urban Development and Urban Housing Department filed affidavit-in-reply on 8.6.2018 in the writ petitions and opposed grant of relief prayed for by the appellants-original petitioners.

7. Learned Single Judge by impugned common judgment dated 1.9.2022, after considering the constitutional provisions and by relying upon several decisions, dismissed the writ petitions by holding that the State Authority has rightly exercised legislative power under Article 243P (d) of the Constitution of India.

8. Hence the present appeals.

9. By an oral order dated 22.9.2022, the Division Bench of this Court directed the State Authorities to make available the original file which has culminated in issuance of the impugned Notification. It was further observed in the said order that the steps taken, if any by State, would be subject to the result of the appeals. Accordingly, file containing original papers is placed before us.

10. Mr. Shalin Mehta, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Maharshi Vijay Patel, learned advocate appearing for HL Patel Advocates for the appellant would submit that Chapter IX-A of the Constitution of India was amended by 74th Amendment Act, 1992 and was made effective on 1.6.1993. He would further submit that Article 243P is defining Article wherein now various words which are used in Chapter IX A to be read and interpreted. Chapter IX A consists of Article 243P to 243 ZG. The respondent authority had issued the impugned Notification under Article 243P (d) which define the territorial area of Municipality as is notified by the Governor, whereas Municipality has been defined under Article 243 P(e) i.e. as an institution of self-government constituted under Article 243 Q. He would further submit that when particular area of village or entire village is required to be included in municipal area and ultimately included in the area of Municipality, it would be a constitution of Municipality itself since the area of Municipality would increase. He would further submit that even if certain area of Municipality is to be decreased, it would result into forming part of the new village Panchayat or any other legal entity.

He would further submit that it is true that Governor has legislative power to declare particular area as Municipal area as per the definition of Article 243P (d). However, only exercising the powers under that pro