RANJANA MULCHANDBHAI SHITLANI Vs. GUJARAT HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed challenging the notice dtd. 20/11/2025 under which the petitioner has been directed to remove encroachment done on a public footpath within a period of 15 days.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Ms. Anmol Ganwani for the petitioner. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that petitioner is a Power of Attorney holder of the property in question in Krushnanagar, Naroda, Ahmedabad. The petitioner is holding Power of Attorney from the original holder of the property and therefore he is the owner of this premises. Learned advocate submitted that regularly tax bills and other bills are paid to the Municipal Corporation and therefore the petitioner being the owner of the property, she is entitled for such construction which she has done. Learned advocate submitted that however before issuance of notice dtd. 20/11/2025 procedure as contemplated under the provisions of the Gujarat Housing Board Act, 1961 has not been followed and hence the notice deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. S. H. Virk for respondent - Corporation submitted that petitioner has no locus to file this petition because the notice dtd. 20/11/2025 is not issued to the petitioner and the name of the petitioner is handwritten. Factually notice has been issued to the original allottee of the property in question who has agreed for redevelopment as per the provisions of the Gujarat Housing Board Act, 1961. Moreover, the encroachment from the photographs is evident on the footpath which under any law is not permissible.