Gujarat High Court
The Xavier Kelavani Mandal Pvt Ltd vs State Of Gujarat on 14 August, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11343 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
THE XAVIER KELAVANI MANDAL PVT LTD
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PERCY KAVINA, SENIOR ADVOCATE for
MR NV GANDHI(1693) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS POOJA CHOUDHARY AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR MAULIK NANAVATI for NANAVATI & CO.(7105) for the
Respondent(s) No. 3
MR PANKEET P AUNDHIYA(9421) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,5
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MAUNA M. BHATT
Date: 14/08/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. At the outset, Learned advocate for the petitioner requested
for draft amendment, to join Town Planning Officer of Town
Planning Scheme No.24/A (Ankodiya-Khanpur-Sevasi-
Mahapura),Vadodara; as party respondent No.5. Draft amendment is
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
permitted, to be carried out forthwith.
2. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP Ms. Pooja Choudhary
waives service of rule on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2, learned
advocate Mr. Maulik Nanavati waives service on behalf of
respondent No.3 and learned advocate Mr. Pankeet P Aundhiya for
respondent Nos.4 and 5. With the consent of learned advocates for
the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.
3. This petition is filed challenging the action of respondent
No.4- Vadodara Urban Development Authority, in issuing notice
under Section 48 A of Gujarat Town Planning and Urban
Development Act, 1976 ('T.P.Act' for short) whereby the petitioner
is directed to give peaceful vacant possession of the land in
question for the purpose of Town Planning Scheme No. 24/A
Ankodiya-Khanpur-Sevasi-Mahapura), Vadodara.
4. Heard learned senior advocate Mr. Percy Kavina with learned
advocate Mr.N.V.Gandhi for the petitioner. Learned senior advocate
submitted that the petitioner is a Company incorporated under
Section 8 of the Companies Act, 1956 and also the registered Public
Charitable Trust under the provisions of Bombay Public Trust Act.
The trust is doing charitable activities, where one of its objects is
to administer education. The petition trust also runs institutions viz.
colleges, schools, hostels, churches, libraries, nurseries, poor homes
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
missions etc. It is case of the petitioner that the trust is owner of
land bearing plot No.876 having Old Survey Nos.945 to 960 total
admeasuring 96012 sq.mtrs situated Mouje/village:Sevasi,
Taluka:Vadodara City (West), District: Vadodara (herein after
referred to as "land in question"). On the said land, the petitioner
constructed a school which has playground. The construction of
school was done after having due permission from respondent No.4
- Vadodara Urban Development Authority (VUDA); and there
operates technical institution-ITI with 600 students. VUDA thereafter
declared an intention to have the Draft Town Planning Scheme No.
24/A Ankodiya-Khanpur-Sevasi-Mahapura), Vadodara. Pursuant to
which, the State Government sanctioned the said Draft Town
Planning Scheme vide its notification dated 17.05.2022. It is case of
the petitioner that under the said Draft Town Planning Scheme,
some portion of the land in question was forming part of the
T.P.Scheme for development of road. Development of road is for
the public purpose, the petitioner gave its portion of land in
question for the development of road and for the portion of land in
question taken for development of road, there is no dispute or
grievance. However, the balance portion of land in question which
is used by the school as playground is also forming part of Town
Planning Scheme and under the Draft Town Planning Scheme No.
24/A, it has been reserved for development of social infrastructure.
For the said declaration of the land reserved for Social Infra
Structure, the petitioner raised its objections. In other words,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
pursuant to Draft Town Planning Scheme, for the portion of land
forming part of Town Planning Scheme No 24/A Vadodara; which
was reserved for Social Infrastructure, the petitioner raised their
objections and filed representation before respondent No.4.
4.1. Learned senior advocate Mr. Kavina invited attention to the
representation dated 10.02.2024 (Annexure K page 55) and
submitted that in response to its representation, a communication
was received from respondent No.4 - VUDA; and from the said
communication it is evident that VUDA had taken note of the
objections raised by the petitioner and suggested that the authority
may consider the objections of the petitioner objectively. VUDA
while forwarding petitioners objections had also noted that the
petitioner is a trust running educational activity and the land in
question is a playground used by the said institution. Learned
advocate further submitted that despite that a communication dated
03.05.2023 at Annexure G page 54, was received and from the
tenure of the said communication it is evident that none of the
objections raised by the petitioner have been considered objectively.
Therefore, the petitioner is constrained to approach this Court
praying for appropriate direction to respondent (Town Planning
Officer), to take cognizance of its objections and then to pass
appropriate orders in accordance with law.
5. Opposing the petition, learned advocate Mr.Nanavati for
respondent No.3 and learned AGP Ms.Pooja Choudhary for
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
respondent Nos.1 and 2 submitted that Draft Town Planning
Scheme No.24/A Ankodiya-Khanpur-Sevasi-Mahapura), Vadodara
was sanctioned by the State Government vide its notification dated
17.05.2022. Thereafter, appointment of Town Planning Officer under
Section 50 of the Town Planning Act has been made. After
appointment of Town Planning Officer and after taking charge, the
Town Planning Officer will invite objections from all the stake
holders as provided under Section 52 of the Act and therefore at
that stage, it is open for the petitioner to raise its objections.
Therefore, this petition being premature deserves rejection at this
stage. Moreover, the procedure provided under the provisions of the
Act will be followed and the order will be passed in accordance
with law and, therefore, the apprehension of the petitioner that its
objections will not be considered is beyond the scheme of the act.
Both Learned advocates however, fairly submitted that in view of
the appointment of Town Planning Officer, if the directions are
issued to the Town Planning Officer, to consider petitioners
objections, no prejudice will be caused to the parties because the
petitioner herein is an trust running educational institution and the
land in question is a playground used by the educational institution.
6. Learned AGP Ms.Choudhary relied upon the decision in the
case of Vishnu Barsu Patil V/s. State of Gujarat in Special Civil
Application No.9403 of 2015 reported in 2016 SCC OnLine Guj
3742, wherein this Court has held as under:
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
"6. In view of the aforesaid factual matrix, it is an
admitted position that the scheme is yet at the stage of
draft scheme, which is sanctioned as provided under
Section 48 of the Act vide Notification dated
02.07.2012. As decided by the Apex Court in the case
of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation v. Ahmedabad
Green Belt Khedut Mandal [2014 (3) GLR 2516], present
petition is premature. The petitioner shall have ample
opportunity to file objections before the Town Planning
Officer, who shall treat such objections as provided
under Rule 26(3) of the Rules and shall consider the
same as provided under Rule 26(4) before preparing and
publishing the preliminary town planning scheme. The
Town Planning Officer shall also consider earlier
objections filed by the petitioner dated 01.02.2010. It
would also be open for the petitioner to file fresh
representation before the Town Planning Officer, who
shall send the said objections along with preliminary
scheme that may be declared by him as provided under
Section 64 of the Act to the State Government and the
State Government shall consider the objections filed by
the petitioner while taking decision on preliminary
scheme before proceeding to sanction the same as
provided under Section 65 of the Act. It is clarified that
this Court has not expressed any opinion on merits.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
7. With these observations and directions, the petition
stands disposed of. Notice is discharged. Direct Service
is permitted."
7. Considering the above submission, it is noticed that now
pursuant to sanctioning of Draft Town Planning Scheme by the
State Government vide Notification dated 17.05.2022, the
appointment of Town Planning Officer under Section 50 of the Act
has been made. Now Town Planning Officer shall follow the
procedure inviting objections by putting the stake holders to the
notice and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.
Therefore, in view of the above fact following order is passed,
(i) It is open for the petitioners to raise its objections along with
necessary documents to the Town Planning Officer, once the notice
as provided under Section 52 read with Rule 26 of T.P.Act and
Rules has been issued to the petitioner. Once the objections are
raised, the Town Planning officer is directed to give personal
hearing to the petitioners, if no such intimation is given till date.
(ii) Once objections are received and personal hearing is provided
to the petitioner, the Town Planning Officer is expected to consider
the said objections objectively and in accordance with law.
8. This Court has not gone into the merits of the matter and it
is open for the Town Planning Officer to pass order in accordance
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/11343/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/08/2025
undefined
with law.
9. With this, the present petition is disposed of. Rule is made
absolute to the aforesaid extent.
10. Direct service is permitted.
(MAUNA M. BHATT,J)
NAIR SMITA V./15
