IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J. L. Odedra, J.
Pushpaben Pravinbhai Vaniya & Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Ors. – Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 7357 of 2025
Decided On : 14-11-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. nature of the petition and factual background. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on jurisdiction of the assistant estate officer. (Para 5 , 6 , 9) |
| 3. claims to rights under the constitution and town planning act. (Para 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 4. counterarguments and the state's position. (Para 11 , 12 , 14) |
| 5. review of the town planning scheme and its finality. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. definitions and delegation of authority under the town planning act. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. proper delegation of powers in municipal governance. (Para 22 , 24) |
| 8. distinction between due process in demolition contexts. (Para 27 , 28) |
| 9. analogous case law not applicable to current petition. (Para 29 , 30) |
| 10. clarification of the petitioners' lack of valid title. (Para 32 , 34) |
| 11. final determination and options for alternative accommodation. (Para 36 , 38 , 40) |
| 12. conclusion of the petition with a reserved liberty for alternative accommodations. (Para 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
J. L. Odedra, J.
1. The petitioners herein, having been aggrieved by the action of the respondent no.2, the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, inter alia, in issuing the order dated 21.05.2025 of the respondent no.3, the Assistant Estate Officer, calling on the petitioners to vacate the subject premises, situated on Original Plot Nos.181 and 182 of Survey No.156 and 181 (original Revenue Survey No.156 and 181) of Village Acher, Sabarmati Taluka, Ahmedabad, have preferred the present Special Civil Application.
2. The prayer clause of the Special Civil Application No.7357 / 2025 reads thus:
(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of certiorari or writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure-A) and notice dated 19.04.2025 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent no. 3 to the petitioners and be pleased to quash and set aside the entire exercise of evicting the petitioners and removing /demolishing the properties occupied by the petitioners situated on land mentioned in sketch overleaf the impugned notice dated 19.04.2025 (Annexure-B).
(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned T.P. Scheme being Final T.P. Scheme No. 23(Sabarmati) being illegal and unconstitutional so far as it affects and relates to properties occupied by the petitioners mentioned in the sketch with notice dated19.04.2025.
(D) During the pendency and till final disposal of the petition, by way of interim relief, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the the impugned order dated 21.05.2025 (Annexure-A) and notice dated 19.04.2025 (Annexure-B) issued by the respondent no. 3 and be pleased to restrain the respondents from taking any further action against the petitioners in pursuance of order and notice Annexure-A and B and be pleased to direct the respondents to maintain the status quo in respect of the properties of the petitioners.
(E) Any other relief deemed fit to meet the ends of justice may be granted.
3. The factual narration, as is forthcoming from the pleadings in the present Special Civil Application, is as follows:
a. The petitioners, who are occupants, having their residences and small space for their livelihood, allegedly since last many decades, have received impugned order dated 21.05.2025, whereby the petitioners have been called upon to handover vacant and peaceful possession of the land mentioned in the said order within seven days to the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, the respondent no.2 herein. That vide the said order, passed by respondent no. 3, Assistant Estate Officer, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, it has been stated that failing the handing over of the possession as aforesaid, the eviction of the petitioners shall follow, including the demolition of the properties of the petitioners.
b. Before the passing of the impugned order dated 21.05.2025, notices dated 19.04.2025,


State of Karnataka v. Narasimha Murthy
Chameli Singh and others v. State of UP.
Kanjibhai Dahyabhai Malsattar and Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat
The Court upheld the Assistant Estate Officer's eviction order under the Town Planning Act, confirming that petitioners' objections were unsubstantiated given their failure to challenge the Town Plan....
The Town Planning Scheme, sanctioned under the Gujarat Town Planning Act, is valid and serves public interest, overriding private claims and previous judicial orders regarding easementary rights.
Point of law: There remains no shadow of doubt that where the draft scheme has been sanctioned by the Government, the lands required for the purposes specified in the clauses (c), (f), (g) or (h) of ....
Authority under the Act of 1976 exercises a quasi-judicial power which implies observing of the principles of natural justice and to conclude that the occupants are not entitled to occupy the plots. ....
The respondent authority is the lawful owner of the Final Plot No. 49 and therefore, unauthorized constructions of tin sheet sheds with iron angles and guarders are without any authority of Rules and....
Point of law: Notwithstanding anything contained in section 70, a town planning scheme may at any time be varied by a subsequent scheme made, published and sanctioned in accordance with the provision....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.