IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) (WRIT PETITION (PIL)) NO. 22 of 2025 ==========================================================

JAYESHBHAI MANUBHAI PATEL & ORS.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR ARPIT KATARIA(11981) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR KIRANKUMAR G PARMAR(11891) for the Applicant(s) No. 2,3,4 MS. POOJA TEJAS BRAHMBHATT(16347) for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3,4 ADITYA A GUPTA(7875) for the Opponent(s) No. 7 MS. MAITHILI MEHTA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2 MR KIRTIDEV R DAVE(3267) for the Opponent(s) No. 4 MS RV ACHARYA(1124) for the Opponent(s) No. 3 NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the Opponent(s) No. 6 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 28/11/2025

ORAL ORDER

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

Taluk-Development Officer, Jambusar Taluka Panchayat, impleaded as respondent No.4 herein, has filed his personal affidavit dated 06.10.2025 in compliance of the order dated 12.09.2025 passed by this Court, wherein an effort has been made by him to justify his action in passing the order dated 02.02.2024 for permitting the respondent No.7 to use the portion of the gaucher land to have an access to the Waste Management Plant established by it.

2. In the said affidavit, the officer posted as Taluka Development Officer, Jambusar Taluka Panchayat states that Magnad Gram Sabha passed resolution dated 17.02.2020 to permit the respondent No.7 company to use the road and the resolution dated 07.01.2021 has been passed to allot the portion of the gaucher land to the respondent No.7 company. However, the Gram Sabha had further resolved on 20.01.2024 to close down the compancy and the said resolution was subject matter of appeal before the Taluka Development Officer, namely the deponent of the aforesaid affidavit. It is contended therein that opportunity of hearing has been granted to the Gram Panchayat before passing the order dated 02.02.2024 and it was asked to produce the relevant documents. The resolutions of 2021 and 2023, as produced with the writ petition, were not produced before the officer by either of the parties. The only documents examined by him were the resolutions dated 17.02.2020 and 20.01.2024 and he having noticed that the Gram Panchayat had reversed its decision indirectly and in the resolution dated 20.01.2024 there was no reference to the previous resolution dated 17.02.2020 or any other resolution, passed the order dated 02.02.2024.

3. Justifying his order, the officer concerned would further state that on consideration of the facts before him, it was noted that the gaucher land on the spot is about 23,331 sq.mtrs. and the disputed portion is only about 2,300 sq.mtrs.. Moreover, the disputed road is also being used by other farmers of the adjoining lands and hence, he decided to suspend the resolution dated 20.01.2024 passed by the Gram Panchayat. It is further stated by the Taluka Development Officer that it was considered that the issue of permission was wide open and was under consideration of the Collector when the resolution was suspended temporarily.

4. Further justification given by the officer concerned is that the change in gaucher land can be used with the permission under the resolution of the competent local body, but it can be avoided if opposed by the local body. Since the opposition by the local body was found improper, he has permitted the respondent No.7 to have access from the gaucher land. It is further stated that Gram Sabha resolved in 2020 to allow the use of gaucher land which continued for four years and thereafter, for the reasons best known to the Gram Sabha, it took U-turn and therefore, suspension of the resolution subject to the decision of the Collector, was just and proper.

5. Reference has been made to the government re