IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16805 of 2024 ==========================================================

NADOLIYA KARIYUMBEN SULEMANBHAI & ANR.

Versus SUTHAR GOVINDBHAI DAHYABHAI & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR.DIPEN F CHAUDHARI(6740) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 MR. JAY TRIVEDI, LD. ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 15 MR. JARJEESKHAN(7235) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,4,5 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 10,11,12,13,14,3,9 REFUSED SERVED (N)(10) for the Respondent(s) No. 6,7,8 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Date : 12/02/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the State-respondent, and learned advocate Mr. Jarjees Khan waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent Nos.1,2,4 and 5.

2. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants have called in question the legality and validity of the order dated 05.09.2024 passed by the respondent No.15-Mamlatdar, Danta in Case No. Daban/Navavas/Case No.1/2023.

3. Facts, in brief, giving rise to the filing of the present writ application may be summarized as under;

3.1 The writ applicants here are the husband and wife. The writ applicant is the owner and occupant of Survey Nos.852 and 854, situated in the sim of village:Navavas, Taluka: Danta and Survey No.853 situated in the sim of village: Navavas, Taluka; Danta is an ancestral property of the writ applicant No.2 which is owned and occupied by his father, namely, Rajebhai Valabhai Manasiya.

3.2 The respondent Nos.1 to 5 herein, who are the owners of Survey Nos.866, 867, 868, 869 and 870, situated in the sim of village: Navavas, Taluka: Danta made one application dated 13.06.2023 to the respondent No.15-Mamlatdar, Danta, alleging therein certain persons have made an illegal encroachment upon Government Survey No.1011, which is required to be removed, as they are having their right of way from the said survey No.1011 to reach to their respective fields as per the earlier order, and an entry to that effect is also mutated in the revenue record.

3.3 The writ applicants were not served with any notice/summons and were telephonically informed about the filing of the said application by the concerned Talati, and as such, the writ applicants appeared through their advocate and filed their written arguments before the Mamlatdar, Danta stating therein that neither they have been served with any notice/summons nor been provided with any documents attached with the original application.

3.4 Thereafter, the Panchnama was carried out by the Circle Officer, Danta and statements were also recorded.

3.5 The Mamlatdar, Danta allowed the application of the respondent Nos.1 to 5, directing the writ applicants and other persons to open the way passing through Survey No.1011 as also not to stop the plaintiffs therein, i.e., the respondent Nos.1 to 5 from passing through the said way.

3.6 Being aggrieved, the writ applicants are here before this Court with the present writ application.

4. Learned advocate Mr.Dipen Chaudhari appearing for the writ applicants submits that the impugned order passed by the Mamlatdar, Danta is unjust, illegal, arbitrary and suffers from vice of non-application of mind. He further submits that while passing the impugned order, the Mamlatdar, Danta has not taken into consideration the materials and evidences available on record in its true sense and proper perspective, and thereby committed a grave error by giving findings in favour of the contesting respondents. Learned advocate Mr. Chaudhari also submits that the Mamlatdar has exceeded its jurisdiction while passing the impugned order. He submits that initially, in 2021, an application was preferred by the respondent No.1 and others before the Mamlatdar, Danta, see