SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1181

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
MAUNA M. BHATT, J.
Mohmmad Sarifvisad Purvala & Ors. - Petitioner 
Versus
Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation & Ors. - Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 2374 of 2021 With R/Special Civil Application No. 2257 of 2021 With R/Special Civil Application No. 2259 of 2021 With R/Special Civil Application No. 2291 of 2021
Decided On : 24-07-2025

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Mr S.I. Nanavati, Senior Advocate with Ms Hetvi H Sancheti (5618)
For the Respondent:Mr G H Virk, Mr Simranjitsingh H Virk, Mr Sahil Trivedi, Advocates

The court determined that unauthorized construction cannot be regularized and emphasized strict compliance with municipal regulations and housing rights, rejecting the claims of the petitioners.

Headnote:(A) Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act, 1949 - Sections 260 and 267 - Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 - Unauthorized construction - Petitioners seek to quash notices to vacate their dwelling units issued by the Corporation, claiming right to adequate housing and alleging ignorance of unauthorized construction - Court highlighted that unauthorized construction despite prior directives and lack of required permissions warrants action - Court found no merit in the petitions and affirmed the illegality of construction as per relevant statutes. (Paras 10 to 21)

Facts of the case:
The petitioners claim ownership of properties they have occupied for over 50 years, asserting they were unaware of unauthorized construction undertaken by the developer. They allege that seizing of their homes due to actions taken against the developer constitutes a violation of their rights under the law.

Findings of Court:
Petitioners had continued unauthorised construction despite clear directives against it, thus the notices to vacate were valid and justified as per statutory requirements.

Issues: The main issues involved the validity of notices to vacate based on unauthorized construction, the ownership rights of petitioners post-development, and the application of relevant housing rights statutes.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that citizens must adhere to the law concerning construction; unauthorized developments cannot be legitimized by claims of ignorance or agreements made with developers. The petitions were devoid of merit as compliance with local ordinances was not observed.

Result: Petitions rejected.

Table of Content
1. petitioners seek protection from eviction. (Para 1 , 4)
2. description of petitions and property ownership (Para 3)
3. hearing and representation by advocates (Para 5 , 6)
4. petitioners argue against notices issued for unauthorized construction. (Para 7 , 8)
5. court reviews procedural history and previous notices. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
6. regularization prohibited due to protected monument status. (Para 13 , 14)
7. unauthorized construction requires strict compliance with laws. (Para 15 , 17)
8. court's position on unauthorized construction and legal principles (Para 16 , 18)
9. court dismisses petition based on illegal construction and breach of laws. (Para 19 , 20)
10. petitions are rejected; no extension of time granted. (Para 21 , 22)

JUDGMENT :

MAUNA M. BHATT, J.

1. Captioned writ petitions are filed seeking to quash and set aside execution and implementation of the notices issued by respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3, dated 11.01.2021; whereby the petitioners were directed to vacate their respective dwelling units within a period of four days, failing which, action in accordance with Law has been indicated. Respondent No.1 herein is Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, Respondent No.2 is Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad and Respondent No.3 is Police Inspector, Jamalpur, Ahmedabad. It is also further prayed that respondents may be directed to provide Legal Security of Tenure/Right to Adequate Housing recognized under Article 11 of International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and other rights narrated in Part III of Constitution of India. The prayer with regard to decision on representation of the petitioners is also made. From earlier orders dated 17.02.2021, 13.03.2021, 15.03.2021 and 23.03.2021 in the captioned writ petitions, it is noticed that after filing of these petitions, time was sought either by petitioners’ advocate or by respondents’ advocate however, till date no notice has been issued in these cases. Thereafter, urgent circulation was sought submitting that a coercive action by demolition of properties of the petitioners, situated at Rangwala Challi, now known as “Shana Apartment” situated at Rangwali Chali, Purbiyawa, Astodia Kot ni rang, Jamalpur, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘property in question’) has started by demolishing 6th floor and onwards and, therefore, this petition may be heard on priority basis. Considering the request, these petitions were taken up for hearing on 15.07.2025.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr. G.H. Virk waives service of rule on behalf of respondent No.1 and learned AGP Mr. Sahil Trivedi waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos.2 and 3.

3. For the sake of convenience, facts referred in Special Civil Application No.2374 of 2021 are considered for adjudication of all petitions. All these petitions, challenge the notices issued to respective petitioners dated 11.01.2021, whereby, they have been directed to vacate the property in question.

4. Facts in brief as referred in the petition are as under:

4.1. The petitioners herein are residents of Rangwala Chali, Jamalpur Area, Ahmedabad; for more than 50 years as tenants/owners, belonging to poor strata of the society. All the petitioners are either unorganized labourer, fruits and vegetable vendors, drivers, rickshaw pullers, daily wagers, foremen, butchers, ac-repairers or small shop owners etc. The petitioners along with their families totaling to more than 250 to 300 people are currently residing in redeveloped Rangwala Challi, now known as “Shana Apartment” situated at Rangwali Chali, Purbiyawa, Astodia Kot ni rang, Jamalpur, Ahmedabad (hereinafter referred to as ‘property in question’). It is case of the petitioners that the property in question was in extremely dilapidated condition and on account of its dilapidated condition, notices from Corporation were issued to vacate the same. At that time, the tenants occupying the property were not sure of their possession if they had decided

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top