IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 992 of 2022 ================================================================

MOHANLAL PRATAPRAI GEHANI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ================================================================

Appearance:

KAUSHAL H PATEL(9328) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR. AYAAN PATEL, AGP, for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR DEEP D VYAS(3869) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 3 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Date : 08/04/2022

ORAL ORDER

[1] This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner seeking direction to the Town Planning OfÏcer to take appropriate action considering the objections given by the petitioner as well as objections given by the predecessor of the petitioner so as to bring suitable changes in the draft town planning scheme No.96/B, Saijpur Bogha insofar it pertains to plot of land of the petitioner.

[2] It is the case of the petitioner that plot of land bearing City Survey No.3436-A of village Sardarnagar was covered under the draft town planning scheme No.96/B Saijpur Bogha and was allotted original plot No. 70/1 admeasuring 418.06 Sq.Mtrs and ultimately having final plot No.64/A was given admeasuring 251.01 Sq.Mtrs.

[3] It is submitted that the predecessor of the petitioner had purchased the aforesaid plot from the original owner on 05.04.1998 and from whom, the present petitioner had purchased the plot. Since 2019, the predecessor of the petitioner had made representations raising the objections at the stage when draft town planning scheme was sanctioned by the Notification in the year

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

[3.1] The petitioner had pointed out that the City Survey No.3634 which was admeasuring 666.25 Sq.Mtrs of which petitioner had purchased 418.06 Sq.Mtrs and the balance land continued with the original owner and against the original plot 70/1, final plot No. 64/1, was allotted and in the ‘F’ form, name of one Bhojrajmal Parwani had appeared though the petitioner had purchased the land by way of registered sale deed from the said Bhojrajmal Parwani. The original plot area of the petitioner being less than 500 Sq.Mtrs and therefore, no deduction was required, still the town planning scheme provides for the deduction in the final plot. The petitioner therefore, is entitled to the size of the plot of his original plot.

[3.2] Thus, objections and representations made by the petitioner were not considered by the respondent-corporation and did not forward the same to the State Government at the time of draft town planning scheme being sanctioned. The Town Planning OfÏcer was appointed in the year 2020. At that stage also, the predecessor of the petitioner had made representations to the Town Planning OfÏcer in this regard. Nothing has been done on the representation of the petitioner or his predecessor and therefore, petition, according to the petitioner, deserves to be considered.

[4] As against this, learned advocate Mr. Deep Vyas appearing for the respondent-corporation submitted that the respondent- corporation as well as Town Planning OfÏcer have acted in accordance with the provisions of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (for short “the Act”), where the respondent-corporation had consulted the Chief Town Planner of Gujarat State on 07.04.2015 under Section 41(1) of the Act, pursuant to which the intention was declared to prepare the draft town planning scheme No.96/B and was also published in the Government Gazette. The draft town planning scheme was given

NEUTRAL CITATION

undefined

objections and thereafter, the town planning scheme was sanctioned. However, there does not appear that any objections were raised by the petitioner and his predecessor. It is submitted that as per the proposal of the sanctioned draft

Click Here to Read the rest of this document