MALAVDEEP PROCON Vs. PANCHAL JAGDISHBHAI PRABHUBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this application, the present applicant has prayed for impleadment as party respondent No.4 in the main Special Civil Application.

(2.) The premise on which the applicant has submitted this application is that the land bearing survey No.93/2 admeasuring 4856 sq. mtrs., original plot No.34, final plot No.34, Mouje Chandlodiya, Taluka Sabarmati, District Ahmedabad, Sub-District Ahmedabad - 8 (Sola) came to be purchased by the present applicant through registered sale agreement dtd. 21/9/2020 from the original owner viz. Jayeshbhai Ratilal Patel and other co- sharers. It is submitted that the original petitioners have preferred a writ petition challenging Draft Town Planning Scheme No.45/B (Chandlodiya) whereby the right of access is given by the Corporation to the present applicant as well as for final plot No.70 which belongs to the State Government. The original petitioners have challenged the Draft Town Planning Scheme No. 45/B (Chandlodiya, Ahmedabad) to the extent of survey No.80, original plot No.21, final plot Nos.21/1 and 21/2 as well as order dtd. 29/4/2021 passed by the Assistant Town Planning Officer (North- West Zone), Ahmedabad. It is the case of the applicant that upon implementation of the aforesaid sanctioned Draft Town Planning Scheme, as a statutory deduction, 7.5 meters T. P. road from the original revenue survey No. 80 has been sanctioned so as to give access to final plot No.34 as well as final plot No.70 and there being the only way to approach the land of the applicant i. e. survey No. 93/2 as per the map of proposed Draft Town Planning Scheme No.45/B, the applicant' rights are entangled and affected. If the petition succeeds and the order of Assistant Town Planning Officer is quashed and set aside, then the applicant would be the most affected person as the sole right of way of the present applicant to access his land i. e. survey No.93/2 will be lost and as such, the applicant would be the most affected person and conveniently, the original petitioners have not joined and based upon no correct facts before the Court, the petition was brought. Since the applicant is directly affected person and the outcome of the writ petition would be clearly affecting either way the rights of the applicant being a owner of survey No.93/2, final plot No.34 which is just adjoining to revenue survey No.80, final plot Nos.21/1 and 21/2, the applicant's presence would be desirable in the interest of justice. Not only the presence of the applicant would be necessary for ultimate outcome of the petition, but with a view to give clear facts before the Court, the presence is inevitable to arrive at just decision and as such, the applicant being a proper and necessary party, present application is submitted. The application appears to have been objected by the original petitioners by way of submitting affidavit-in-reply on page 147 and with this background, the Civil Application is taken up for hearing. The Civil Application along with the papers of main Special Civil Application were taken up by the Court on frequent occasions and lastly, vide order dtd. 25/8/2021, the Court directed to list the Civil Application along with the papers of main Special Civil Application and accordingly, the present Civil Application is taken up for hearing with the consent of learned advocates appearing for the respective parties.

(3.) Learned senior counsel Mr. Shalin Mehta assisted by learned advocate Mr. Mrugesh Barot for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is the original owner and occupier of survey No.93/2, original plot No.34, final plot No.34 and the applicant has become the owner of the land in question through a valid registered sale transaction dtd. 21/9/2020 which transaction in question has never been in a litigation in any form and therefore, the outcome of the main petition of any nature would directly hit the right of the applicant and as such, on that count as well, the applicant's presence is necessary in the proceedings. It has further been contended that for ingress and outgress, the only way to approach the land of the applicant is clearly visible from the map of the proposed Town Planning Scheme No. 45/B and to substantiate his stand, learned senior counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to various documents attached to the application including the relevant documents from the writ petition and thereby, has submitted that if the petition succeeds, only right of the applicant to his way will be jeopardized and hence, the presence of the applicant is inevitable. As a result of this, it is requested to allow this application.