The right to seek variation of a Town Planning Scheme is not absolute and must be exercised in accordance with procedural requirements; earlier objections must be raised during the planning process.

ORDER :

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. Having heard learned counsels for the parties and perused the record, pertinent is to note that this intra Court appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 19.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition refusing to interfere with the order dated 02.12.2022 passed by the Chief Town Planning officer, as also the order dated 09.01.2024 passed by the Nagarpalika.

2. The dispute in the writ petition was pertaining to the Town Planning Scheme namely T.P. Scheme No.1 (Bilimora -Desra).

3. The original petitioners–appellant herein claims to be a society which was formed in the year 1992 for the purposes of development of the land which is Revenue Survey No.485/1, part of the Town Planning Scheme in the year 1992.

4. As per the statement made in the writ petition, in lieu of Revenue Survey No.485/1 owned by the petitioner No.1– Society, Final Plot no. 72/A and 72/B admeasuring 8205 sq. mtrs. and Final Plot no.72/C admeasuring 8086 sq. mtrs., were allotted to the Society. Pertinent as to note that the petitioner No.1 is an unregistered Society.

5. It seems that the land in question was developed after seeking permission of the Collector to convert it into the Non- Agricultural Land and the said permission was granted on 13.04.1992. The record indicates that the draft Town Planning Scheme was notified on 16.10.1992 under the Town Planning Act, 1976 with an appointment of the Town Planning Officer by the State Government. The proceedings for preparation of preliminary scheme was initiated. The order impugned dated 02.12.2022 passed by the Chief Town Planning Officer categorically records that as per the comment submitted by the Town Planning Officer, during the course of preparation of the Preliminary Town Planning Scheme as per Section 52 of the Act, 1976, the objections were invited by sending individual notices to the agreed persons. It is recorded therein that in the initial notice dated 13.03.1995, the date fixed for hearing of the objections was 22.03.1995. However, the land holders of the land in question remained absent. Again pursuant to the notice dated 22.02.1999, on the date fixed i.e. 25.02.1999, the petitioners submitted their objections pertaining to carving out of road but no objection was taken about the reservation, though objections were invited both for the road and reservations made from the plot in question under the Town Planning Scheme.

6. The order impugned further records that the Town Planning Officer had again issued a notice on 18.06.2005 inviting individual objections of the land holders including the petitioners herein intimating the date fixed as 27.06.2005, however, the petitioners remained absent. Again, a public notice dated 27.06.2005 was issued, but the petitioners-land holders remained absent to agitate their grievances. On 05.03.2010, for the first time, after two years, the President of the petitioner - Society along with 10 members remained present with the Town Planning Officer to agitate their grievances.

7. The Town Planning Officer during preparation of the Town Planning Scheme made consultation with the State Government as also the local authority in the year 2012 – 2013. The Preliminary Town Planning Scheme prepared by the Town Planning Officer was forwarded to the State Government on 01.08.2014 after consideration of various objections raised by the land holders – persons affected by the Preliminary Scheme and it was finally sanctioned and notified under Section 67 of the Town Planning Act on 27.05.2019.

8. Pertinent is to note that, a