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

GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Bhargav D. Karia, J.
Sukeshi Vijaybhai Bhatt —Petitioner
versus
State of Gujarat —Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No.9466 of 2019 with Civil Application (For Stay) No.1 of 2020 in R/Special Civil Application No.9466 of 2019
Decided on 7.5.2021

Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner Nos.1, 2, 3:Mr. A.B. Munshi(1238), Advocate
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Gaurang Waghela, Advocate for Chintan K. Gandhi(8600)
For the Respondent No.1: Mr. Ishan Joshi, A.G.P.(1)
For the Respondent No.5:Mr. Chirayu Mehta, Advocate for Mr. Devang Vyas(2794)
For the Respondent No.6:Mr. Rituraj M. Meena(3224), Advocate
For the Respondent Nos.3, 4: Notice Served By D.S.(5)
For the Respondent No.2:Mr. Maulin Raval, Sr. Advocate Raval and Trivedi Associates(9262)

IMPORTANT POINT
Land acquired for a public purpose can be utilised for any other public purpose and once possession of land in taken and land is vested in Municipality free from all encumbrances, restitution of surplus land to erstwhile owner cannot be ordered.

Headnote:

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24 – Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 – Section 20(2) – Allotment of acquired land for town planning – Land acquired for a public purpose can be utilised for any other public purpose and once possession of land in taken and land is vested in Municipality free from all encumbrances, restitution of surplus land to erstwhile owner cannot be ordered – Petitioners or their predecessors have not raised any objection at relevant point of time and only when possession of land in question was sought to be taken, it was resisted by original owners in year 2008 and thereafter by father of petitioners in year 2012 but inspite of rejection of representation made by them, petitioners continued to be in possession of land in question which was ultimately taken over by Municipal Corporation in year 2017 – Petitioners cannot be granted any benefit of either compensation or restoration of land in question vis-à-vis use of land to be made for public purpose by respondent corporation – Land has continued to be vested for public purpose – Petition dismissed. (Paras 31, 32, 33 and 34)

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT (CAV)

Bhargav D. Karia, J.—Heard learned advocate Mr. A.B. Munshi for the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Ishan Joshi for the respondent No.1—State, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Maulin Raval for Raval & Trivedi Associates and learned advocate Mr. Gaurang Waghela for learned advocate Mr. Chintan Gandhi for respondent No.2, learned advocate Mr. Chirayu Mehta for learned advocate Mr. Devang Vyas for respondent No.5, learned advocate Mr. Rituraj Meena for respondent No.6 through video conference.

2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs :

“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit and allow this petition.

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus or writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned T.P Scheme being Town Planning Scheme, Ahmedabad-24 (Maninagar Extension ) varied so far as it relates to Final Plot No.64/4 admeasuring 7289 sq.matrs.and be pleased to hold and declare that entry of reservation made in ‘‘F’’ form in the land of original F.P.No 64 and 71 is also illegal and be pleased to delete the same and be pleased to delete the name of appropriate authority and reference of post and telegraph department and slum clearance board from the ‘‘F’’ form of F.P.No.64/4 and be pleased to direct the authority to enter the name of the petitioners in ‘‘F’’ form and all other relevant record of F.P.No.64/4.

(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to further hold and declare that if the subject land being F.P No.64/4 admeasuring 7289 sq.mtr.is required for any public purpose then in that case, the authorities may be directed to initiate the proceedings for acquisition of the same as per the provisions of the Right to Fair compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition and Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 and be pleased to direct the authorities not to disturb the possession and enjoyment of the petitioners and their family members over the subject land unless and until the petitioner are paid compensation determine as per the Land Acquisition Act, 2013 as per the prevalent market rate.

(D) During the pendency and till final disposal of the petition, by way of interim relief, Your Lordships may be pleased to direct service the respondent not to interfere with actual physical possession of the petitioners over the subject land being F.P.No.64/4 admeasuring 7289 sq.mtr. of T.P. Scheme, Ahmedabad-24 (Maninagar Extension) Varied and not to deal with the subject land in any manner whatsoever and pleased to direct the authorities to maintain the status quo in respect of the subject land.

(F) Any other relief deemed just and proper may pleased the granted in the interest of justice.”

3. The petitioners and the family members are the owners of land bearing Final Plot No. 64/4 admeasuring 7289 sq. mtrs. alloted in T.P. Scheme Ahmedabad-24 (Maninagar Extension Varied) situated in Maninagar area of Ahmedabad city. According to the petitioners, the land in question is mutated in the name of the petitioners and the family members in the revenue record in village Form no. 7/12 of village Rajpur-Hirpur, Taluka Maninagar, District Ahmedabad.

4. The land admeasuring 18870 sq mtrs. situated in Survey no. 217 and land admeasuring 1720 sq mtrs. situated in survey no. 448, total land admeasuring 20590 sq mtrs. situated in Sim of village Rajpur-Hirpur, Taluka Maninagar, District Ahmedabad belonged to one Chunilal Chhaganlal Bhatt who was predecessor in title of the petitioners and after his demise, the said lands were inherited by his legal heirs.

5. The aforesaid land of survey Nos.217 and 448 was acquired by respondent no.2-Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (For short “AMC”) by passing resolution no.63 of 1957 dated 20.11.1957. Notification under

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