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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 1249

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Anirudha P. Mayee, J
HARI DHAMA VARCHANDV/sSTATE OF GUJARAT
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1451 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SI Nanavati, Mrugen K Purohit
For the Respondents: Mihir Joshi, Aishwarya Gupta, Nikunj Kanara

Legal leaseholders in possession of demarcated land are entitled to protection against summary eviction during encroachment removal drives, provided they can establish valid leasehold rights.

Headnote:The petitioners challenge a notice dated 22.01.2026 issued by the Port Authority threatening the removal of encroachments and initiation of proceedings under the Land Grabbing Act. The petitioners claim to be valid leaseholders of salt pan lands since 1989, with leases renewed periodically, and seek protection of their legal possession. The primary issue is whether the notice for removal of encroachments can be applied to lands held under valid leases. The court observed that while the respondent is implementing orders from the National Green Tribunal and other statutory authorities to remove illegal encroachments, those in possession of demarcated areas under valid leases should not be dispossessed. Till the next date of hearing, the respondent no.3 shall not disturb the possession of the petitioner no.2 in respect of the Plot No.50 at Village Chudva, admeasuring 10 acres as per the map produced by the petitioner at page no.43 of the petition.

Table of Content
1. challenge to eviction notices based on existing valid leasehold rights for salt pan lands. (Para 1 , 2)
2. the necessity of land demarcation and material particulars to distinguish legal possession from illegal encroachment. (Para 3 , 4)
3. grant of interim protection against dispossession pending further verification of lease documents and demarcation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)

ORAL ORDER

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners herein are praying for a direction to quash and set aside the impugned notice dated 22.01.2026 issued by the respondent no.3-Deendayal Port Authority. By the said notice, it is stated that all the encroachments, illegal occupation on the lands held by the respondent no.3-Port Authority shall be removed and appropriate proceedings shall also be undertaken under the Land Grabbing Act as well as other relevant Acts. The public at large has been cautioned to stay away from encroaching upon the land of the Port Authority.

2. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.S.I.Nanavati appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the petitioners are lease holders in respect of different parcels of land, which have been allotted by the Collector for the purpose of salt pans. He submits that the petitioners are holding valid lease rights in the lands in their possession since 1989 and the leases thereof have been renewed from time to time. He also relies on Annexure-B being the chart depicting the lands allotted to the petitioners and in their possession and the tenure of leases. As per the the said chart, lease renewal is also pending in respect of the petitioner nos.14 to 22. He submits that as on date the petitioners are only trying to protect the land legally in their possession. He submits that in respect of the excess land in their possession, a sympathetic view be taken.

3. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Mihir Joshi with learned counsel Ms.Aishwarya Gupta appearing for respondent no.3 submits that the petition is vague in its averments as well as in material particulars. He submits that the petitioners have deliberately not disclosed the extent of lands in their possession. He submits that no details in respect of the demarcation of such lands held in their possession have been placed on record. He submits that only the longitude and latitude of the land in possession of the petitioner no.2 has been placed on record at page no.43 of the petition. He submits that beyond that, there are no material particulars in respect of the rest of the petitioners in the petition. He submits that the respondent no.3 is only removing the encroachments made on the land of the Port Authority and is only implementing the orders passed by the National Green Tribunal and other statutory authorities. He submits that respondent no.3 is only concerned with the lands, which are in its possession. He submits that if the petitioners place on record the material particulars of the lands in question, which is being held by them including the longitude and latitude of such lands, then the same will be examined appropriately.

4. Learned Senior Advocate Mr.Mihir Joshi with learned counsel Ms.Aishwarya Gupta, upon instructions of Shri Ramindra Reddy, Chief Engineer, Deendayal Port Authority, submit that the details of the land in possession of petitioner no.2, placed at page no.43 being Plot No.50 at Village Chudva, shall not be proceeded with against for removal of any encroachment to that extent of its boundaries. Further, he submits that the petitioners have approached this Court only on the apprehension that the lands in their legal possession would be taken away, whereas the respondent no.3-Port Authorities are taking action only in respect of the encroachments made on their lands. He submits that the apprehension of the petitioner is unfounded. If they are in possession of the demarcated area under the valid lease executed in their favour, the same will not dispossessed.

5. Considered the submiss

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