SHRI GAYATRIKRUPA CO. OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. v. STATE OF GUJARAT
SCA/15772/2024 · 2025-11-10
Mauna M Bhatt
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7629 (GUJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 7629 (GUJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
C/SCA/15772/2024 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15772 of 2024 ========================================================== SHRI GAYATRIKRUPA CO. OP. HOUSING SOCIETY LTD. & ORS. Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR. BK. RAJ(3794) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,2.1,2.2,2.3,2.4,3,4,5,5.1,5.2,6,6.1,6.2,6.3,7,8 MS SUMAN MOTLA ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1 MR SATYAM Y CHHAYA(3242) for the Respondent(s) No. 3,4,5,6 MS. BHAVNA D ACHARYA(6406) for the Respondent(s) No. 2 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
Date : 10/11/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. This petition is filed with a prayer to modify/vary the Town Planning Scheme No.1, Taluka:Dabhoi, District: Vadodara. It is case of the petitioners that pursuant to finalization of Town Planning Scheme No.1, Taluka:Dabhoi, District:Vadodara petitioner’s property is getting affected because portion of the petitioner’s property has been given as final Plot No.122 to respondent Nos.3 to 6. Learned advocate submitted that pursuant to the finalization of Town Planning Scheme No.1, Dabhoi in the year 1994, the petitioners raised objections, however, the same has not been considered and
C/SCA/15772/2024 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 therefore, this petition is filed. Further, the objections are filed under Section 70 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act 1976. (“the Act 1976” for short) seeking variation in the Town Planning Scheme, despite that till date, no proposal has been sent by respondent No.2 - Dabhoi Municipality to the State Government. Therefore, appropriate directions may be issued to respondent no.-2 to decide the said representation. 2. Learned advocate Mr. Satyam Chhaya on the other hand invited attention of this Court to the fact that the Town Planning Scheme No.1, Taluka:Dabhoi. District:Vadodara was finalized in the year 1994. Prior to that, the due procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Act 1976 has been followed. Pursuant to finalization of Town Planning Scheme No.1, Dabhoi, respondent Nos.3 to 6 have been allotted final plot No.122, however, the possession of the same could not be handed over to respondent Nos. 3 to 6 on account of non- implementation of the scheme. The only issue raised in the petition is that consideration of objection of the petitioners under Section 70 of the Act to which admittedly, till date, no proposal has been sent by respondent No.2 to the State Government.
Moreover, as per the settled legal position, the scheme once it is finalized is to be implemented as
C/SCA/15772/2024 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 expeditiously as possible and because of such non- implementation, respondent No.3 to 6 are deprived of the possession of their final plot for no fault of them. 2.1. Moreover, respondent Nos. 3 to 6 has filed Special Civil Application No.5004 of 2012 seeking implementation of the Town Planning Scheme No.1, Dabhoi and the same is pending. 3. Considering the submissions and noticing that the only grievance raised in the petition is with regard to consideration of representation in a form of objection, seeking proposal for variation by the Municipal Corporation to the State Government, following directions are issued: (i) Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the objection/representation of the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of this order. (ii) The objections are directed to be decided in accordance with law and without being influenced by any of the pending proceedings, keeping in mind that the Town Planning Scheme No.1, Dabhoi has been finalized vide notification of the State Government in the year 1994 and therefore, the same is required to be implemented in its entirety. Page 3 of 4
C/SCA/15772/2024 ORDER DATED: 10/11/2025 (iii) If Respondent No.2 is directed to pass reasoned order on the objections of the petitioners. 4. With this, the present petition is disposed of. 5. This Court has not gone into the merits of the matter and this order is passed considering the facts of this case and may not be treated as precedent. (MAUNA M. BHATT,J) NAIR SMITA V./13 Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge. Digitally signed by: SMITA VINU NAIR(HC00186), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 10/11/2025 18:03:57