ORAL ORDER

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Prashant Chavda on behalf of the petitioners, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jayneel Parikh on behalf of respondent – State, learned Advocate Mr. Kaash K. Thakkar on behalf of respondents no. 3 and 4 and learned Advocate Ms. Niyati Chauhan on behalf of respondents no. 9 and 10.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioners have inter alia raised a grievance that certain properties of the petitioners, have been demolished by the Gram Panchayat without following the due process and without affording appropriate opportunity.

3. It appears in this regard that the petitioners, are all residents of Village: Samarkha, Taluka and District: Anand and whereas it is the case of the petitioners that certain constructions, which have been carried out by the petitioners, on their own private land, have been demolished by the Gram Panchayat. It is also the case of the petitioners that while notices had been issued by Gram Panchayat, yet, no final order had been issued by the Gram Panchayat and whereas procedure as envisaged under Section 105 of the Gujarat Panchyat Act had also not been followed.

4. As against the same, it appears to be the contention of the respondent – Gram Panchayt that procedure had been followed inasmuch as the notices had been issued to the petitioners and the upon the petitioners submitting their objections, a decision had been taken by the Gram Panchayat and whereas it is only thereafter the demolition had been effected.

5. Learned Advocate Mr. Chavda for the petitioners would submit that while undoubtedly notices had been issued to the petitioners. yet, the petitioners had also submitted their reply thereto and whereas the respondents, had not taken any decision thereupon and had unilaterally proceeded to demolish the properties of the petitioners without taking any appropriate decision. A further grievance being raised is that the respondents were under an obligation to follow the procedure as laid down under Section 105 of the Gujarat Panchayat Act and whereas such a procedure is observed in its breach. Learned Advocate would also submit that some of the petitioners have suffered serious losses inasmuch as certain properties of the petitioners, were taken away by the respondent Gram Panchayat during course of demolition and the petitioners are also required to be compensated for the same.

6. As against the same the petition is vehemently objected to by learned Advocate Ms. Niyati Chauhan on behalf of the Gram Panchayat who would submit that the petitioners were issued three notices that is notice dated 15.05.2026. 20.05.2026 and 25.05.2026 by the Gram Panchayat and whereas the Gram Panchayat had thereafter passed a resolution on 01.06.2026, whereby it was decided that the properties of the petitioners, are required to be demolished. Learned Advocate would also submit that even before the demolition had been effected, a notice had been issued to the petitioners on 05.06.2026 whereby the petitioners had been informed that on 08.06.2026 at 11.00 AM, the authority of Gram Panchayat would take steps for demolishing the properties in question.

7. Submissions of learned Advocate Ms. Niyati Chauhan have been supported by learned Advocate Mr. Kaash Thakkar appearing on behalf of respondents no. 3 and 4.

8. Learned Assistant Governmen