Back
2024 Supreme(Guj) 7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
Panchal Jagdishbhai Prabhubhai – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 7859 Of 2021 with Civil Application (For Vacating Interim Relief) No. 3 Of 2021
Decided On : 01-02-2024
Important Points
Subject
Land Acquisition - Town Planning Scheme
Act Referred
GUJARAT TOWN PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT ACT : S.48(a), S.68, S.43(3)(c), S.43(3)(f), S.43(3)(g), S.43(3)(h), S.48(1), S.48(a)(1), S.48(2), S.69, S.41(1)
GUJARAT TOWN PLANNING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT RULES : R.33, R.18
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.188
Headnote
(B) Judicial Pronouncements - The Court ruled that a binding judicial pronouncement cannot be overridden by legislative power, but the Town Planning Scheme serves public interest and is sanctioned under the Act. (Paras 13.1, 14.12)
(C) Public Interest - The Court highlighted the necessity of the Town Planning Scheme for public access and development, affirming the authority's right to implement the scheme despite private objections. (Paras 14.9, 14.10)
Facts of the case:
The petitioners, occupants of land in Chandlodiya, challenged the Town Planning Scheme that designated their internal road as public, fearing loss of property and access. The scheme was sanctioned by the State Government, allowing the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation to claim land for public use.
Findings of Court:
The Court upheld the Town Planning Scheme, stating it was legally sanctioned and necessary for public access, dismissing the petitioners' claims.
Issues: The main issues included the validity of the Town Planning Scheme against prior judicial orders and the public interest served by the scheme.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court reasoned that the Town Planning Scheme was legally sanctioned and served public interest, thus overriding private claims to the contrary.
Result: Petition dismissed.
For the Petitioner: Ms. Megha Jani.
For the Respondent: Mr. Nandish Y. Chudgar, Mr. Shalin Mehta, Sr. Counsel with Mr. Mrugesh A. Barot, Ms. Dhwani Tripathi.
JUDGMENT :
1. RULE, returnable forthwith. Learned advocates appearing for the respective parties waive service of Rule for and on behalf of the respective parties.
2. By way of the present Petition, petitioners herein have prayed for the following reliefs:
“(A) that the Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus and/or certiorari or a writ in the nature of mandamus and/or certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction
(i) quashing and setting aside Town Planning Scheme No. 45/B Chandlodiya to the extent it pertains to land bearing Final Plot No. 21/1 and 21/2, Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District Sub-District Ahmedabad;
Alternatively,
commanding the respondents to take all steps to vary Town Planning Scheme No. 45/B, Chandlodiya to the extent it pertains to land bearing Final Plot No. 21/1 and 21/2, Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District, Sub- District Ahmedabad so as not to treat road situated between Final Plot No. 21/1 and 21/2, Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District Sub-District Ahmedabad as a public street and not to deduct any land from Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District, Sub-District Ahmedabad;
(ii) Commanding the Respondents not to treat and/or use road situated between Final Plot No. 21/1 and 21/2, Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District Sub- District Ahmedabad as a public street in any manner;
(iii) Quashing and setting aside order dated 29.04.2021 passed by Assistant Town Planning Officer (North West Zone) (at Annexure T);
(B) that pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay Town Planning Scheme No. 45/B Chandlodiya to the extent it pertains to land bearing Final Plot No. 21/1 and 21/2, Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District, Sub-District Ahmedabad;
(C) that pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to restrain the Respondents from treating and/or using the road between Final Plot No. 21/1 and 21/2, Original Plot No.21, Revenue Survey No.80, Village Chandlodiya, District Sub-District Ahmedabad as a public street in any manner;
(D) that pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, the Hon'ble Court be pleased to stay order dated 29.04.2021 passed by Assistant Town Planning Officer (North West Zone) (at Annexure T)
(E) for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer (B), (C) and (D) above;
(F) For costs;
(G) for such other and further reliefs as the circumstances may require.”
3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present Petition read thus:
3.1. The petitioners are the occupants of various sub-plots situated at Raykanagar Society, Chandlodiya, Ahmedabad. The dispute in question pertains to the land admeasuring Acre 2-07 Guntha bearing Survey No. 80, Village: Chandlodiya, District Sub-District: Ahmedabad. The said land was originally owned by one Bababhai Vithhaldas, who passed way on 13.04.1983. The said land came to be sold to promoters of Raykanagar Cooperative Housing Society (proposed). The Society was developed from 1984 and 96 sub-plots and internal roads were carved out on Survey No. 80 and the said plots were sold to various persons. At present, approximately 137 residential units are situated on the said land. The main internal road of the society is of approximately the width of 15 to 25 feet, which ends at sub-plot no. 96. There is a temple on Survey No. 96, which was built with contributions of residents of the society. The internal roads including the one that leads to the temple are used by the residents also for the purpose of parking their vehicles, for organizing events like marriage, other social gathering, prayer meetings, religious functions as well as, as a space fo
