KESHAVBHAI BHULABHAI AND NIKHIL KESHAVLAL PATEL v. SECRETARY
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 3467 of 1996 For Approval and Signature: Hon'ble MISS JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT ============================================================
Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgements?
To be referred to the Reporter or not?
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgement?
Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder?
Whether it is to be circulated to the Civil Judge? -------------------------------------------------------------- KESHAVBHAI BHULABHAI AND NIKHIL KESHAVLAL PATEL Versus SECRETARY -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: MR CC BHALJA for Petitioner MR TH SOMPURA, A.G.P. for Respondent No. 1 MR HS MUNSHAW for Respondent No. 2 MR PRASHANT G DESAI for Respondent No. 3 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : MISS JUSTICE R.M.DOSHIT Date of decision: 17/12/96 ORAL JUDGEMENT (cid:9)Petitioner is the owner of the land bearing survey No. 236, admeasuring 7892 sq.mtrs. situated at Vasna. Under Town Planning Scheme No.26, said lands have been reserved for "public housing" under sec.l2(2) (K) of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]. A Notification of reservation under the Act was issued on 16th September, 1983. It appears that the said lands were not acquired or used for the purpose for which it were reserved for l0 years. The petitioner, therefore, on 25th August, July, 1995, served a notice under sec.20(2) to appropriate authority requiring it to acquire the lands. Inspite of the said notice, the appropriate authority failed to take any step to acquire the said lands either by agreement or under the Land Acquisition Act, l894. The petitioner has, therefore, preferred this petition for declaration that the reservation of the said lands under the Town Planning Scheme published on 16th September, 1983 has lapsed.
2.(cid:9)The matter at issue in this petition is no more res - integra. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority v. Manilal Gordhandas and others [JT 1996 (8) SC 646], has decided the point at issue against the land owners. The Court has held that the draft development plan which was sanctioned and notified on 2.11.1987 shall be deemed to be the final development plan within the meaning of section 20 of the Gujarat Town Planning Act. As such, period of ten years has to be calculated and counted with reference to 3rd December, l987 the date when such final development plan was to come into force. (cid:9)In view of the above decision, the final development plan having come into force on 3rd December, 1987, the petitioner could not have invoked the provisions of section 20(2) of the Act before the expiry of ten years from 3.l2.1987. Thus, the notice given on 25th August, 1995 was premature and no declaration can be given as is prayed for by the petitioner. (cid:9)In the event, this petition fails. Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. (cid:9) /////
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Constitution of India; Land Acquisition Act; Gujarat Town Planning Act — s. 20.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Gujarat High Court, on 17 Dec 1996. The bench was R M DOSHIT.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.