MANILA BHUDARBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:

(2.) Learned advocate Mr.Rachh states that all the petitioners are claiming to be legal heirs of persons claiming to be owner by way of permanent tenancy and they are residing on this piece of land since last more than 30 years. It is the case of the petitioners that though the residents of the petitioners situate on the original plot and final plots were allotted to the petitioners, there is encroachment on the final plots, out of which some encroachment was made by the petitioners of Special Civil Application No.921 of 2011 i.e. Jayantibhai Haribhai Parmar and others and they have preferred application under Sec. 6 of the Gujarat Regularization of Unauthorized Development Act, 2022 and in view of the same Special Civil Application No.921 of 2011 was withdrawn by the petitioners. Therefore, since the application for regularization of unauthorized of unauthorized construction is preferred by petitioners of Special Civil Application No.921 of 2011, who are encroachers according to learned advocate Mr.Rachh, even if application for regularization of unauthorized construction is decided in favour of petitioners of Special Civil Application No.921 of 2011, the right of the present petitioners to claim the vacant possession of the final would not be affected and that aspect be clarified before deciding the matter by issuing appropriate directions.

(3.) In view of the above factual situation, learned advocate Mr.Rachh states that though at present notice issued to the petitioners is under Sec. 67 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 and considering the fact that the petitioners may get another opportunity to put forward their case as and when notice under Sec. 68 read with Rule 33 of the Town Planning Rules is granted, the petitioners may be heard only after the application preferred by the petitioners of Special Civil Application No.921 of 2022 is decided by the designate authority and thereafter only the present petitioners may be heard.