Gujarat High Court
Abbasi Mohammedvasim S/O Jakirhusen vs State Of Gujarat on 18 July, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/WPPIL/12/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) (WRIT PETITION (PIL)) NO. 12 of 2025
==========================================================
ABBASI MOHAMMEDVASIM S/O JAKIRHUSEN
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR SUBRAMANIAM IYER(2104) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
ROBIN PRASAD(9344) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MS. HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Opponent(s) No. 1
MR DEEP D VYAS(3869) for the Opponent(s) No. 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY
Date : 18/07/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL) The present petition has been filed through a practicing advocate in the nature of Public Interest Litigation with the assertion that the petitioner is engaged in social work for betterment of the slum dwellers.
2. The prayers made in the writ petition are as under :-
"(A) That Your Lordships will be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, or order quashing and setting aside the impugned order Annexure-B dated 27.01.2025 passed by the Respondent No.2 and further be pleased to direct the respondents to rehabilitate and provide alternative accommodation to the slum dwellers listed in the list Annexure-A residing in the hutments situated on land bearing original Plot No. 58/A, 58/P forming part of Revenue Survey Page 1 of 4 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:42:54 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/WPPIL/12/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined No. 347 of T.P.Scheme No. 03 (Ranip) under the Regulations of Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of the Slums-2010 or under any other housing scheme framed by the government for EWS and urban poor before evicting as has been provided to the other similarly situated hutment dwellers under the housing scheme for urban poor framed by the government;
(B) Such other and further relief that is just, fit and expedient in the facts and circumstances of the case may be granted."
3. On the presentation of the writ petition, Mr. G.H.Virk, the learned advocate appearing for the respondent Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation made a statement that for the same cause of action, a writ petition namely SCA No. 23156 of 2005 was filed in the name of a civil rights organisation, namely 'Jan Sangharsh Manch', where the issues pertaining to settlement of hutment dwellers on the plot in question namely original plot No. 58/A, 58/P forming part of the Revenue Survey No. 347 of the TP Scheme No.03 (Ranip) under the Regulations of Rehabilitation and Redevelopment of Slums, 2020 or any other hosing scheme framed by the State Government for EWS and urban poor, was adjudicated.
4. Noticing the above, by order dated 11.03.2025, we have summoned the record of SCA No. 23156 of 2005 which has been decided vide judgment and order dated 12.06.2025, which reads as under :-
"We have heard learned advocate Mr. Subramaniam H. Iyer for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr. Mitul Shelat for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.
2. Learned advocate for the petitioner Mr. Subramaniam Iyer has submitted that out of 198 hutment dwellers, 74 hutment dwellers have already been provided accommodation in the first phase. Thereafter, the remaining hutment dwellers have Page 2 of 4 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:42:54 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/WPPIL/12/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined submitted their applications and their application may be decided in accordance with law.
3. In view of the aforesaid factual position, we deem it proper to dispose of the petition with a direction to the respondent authorities to decide all the pending applications in accordance with law preferably within a period of three months.
4. With the aforesaid direction, this writ petition is finally disposed of. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
5. A perusal of the order of the disposal of the aforesaid writ petition indicates that the petitioner was represented by Mr. Subramaniam Iyer therein who is representing the petitioners herein. It was noted by this Court that out of 198 hutment dwellers, 74 hutment dwellers had already been provided accommodation in the first phase of rehabilitation, however, for the remaining hutment dwellers, it was noted that they have submitted their applications and while issuing directions to decide their applications in accordance with the law, the writ petition was finally disposed of.
6. It is, thus, clear that out of 198, 124 hutment dwellers remained, whose claims for rehabilitation being the hutment dwellers on the plot-in-question were required to be considered by the Municipal Corporation.
7. In the present petition, which is filed by a different person claiming to agitate the right of some of the hutment dwellers, whose cases were agitated in the SCA No. 23156 of 2005, seeks to raise the issue of rejection of claims of approximately 220 hutment dwellers. It is sought to be submitted by the petitioners that the claims of the hutment dwellers for rehabilitation have not been considered in accordance with and in the spirit of the judgment and Page 3 of 4 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:42:54 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/WPPIL/12/2025 ORDER DATED: 18/07/2025 undefined order dated 12.06.2015 passed by this Court and the Corporation has erred in rejecting their names by order dated 27.01.2025. It is submitted by Mr. Subramaniam Iyer, the learned advocate appearing for the petitioners that separate orders dated 27.01.2025 have been passed by the respondent No.2, namely the concerned officer of AMC, rejecting the claims of 220 hutment dwellers, out of which, admittedly the claims of 124 hutment dwellers was directed to be considered by this Court in the judgment and order dated 12.06.2015.
8. Once we find that the Corporation has considered the individual applications of the hutment dwellers, the present petition filed in the nature of public interest litigation challenging the order dated 27.01.2025 agitating individual claim of hutment dwellers for their rehabilitation, cannot be entertained. The proper course of action for the applicants, whose applications have been rejected vide orders dated 27.01.2025, is to challenge the order against them by availing appropriate remedy.
9. The present petition is dismissed accordingly being the second writ petition filed for the same cause of action, though with different reliefs, with the liberty rests with the individual applicant to approach the competent court for redressal of their grievance.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ ) (D.N.RAY,J) C.M. JOSHI Page 4 of 4 Uploaded by C.M. JOSHI(HC01073) on Mon Jul 21 2025 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 21 21:42:54 IST 2025