On Friday, the Gujarat High Court, refused to intervene in an order permitting the partial demolition of a historic mosque, estimated to be 400 years old, to widen a road leading to Sabarmati railway station in Ahmedabad.
The Mutawalli highlighted the mosque’s historical and religious significance, noting multiple reconstructions and its registration as Mancha Masjid Trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. Being a Waqf property, it falls under Waqf Board supervision as per the Waqf Act, 1995.
The State emphasized the road’s strategic importance for traffic regulation, emergency vehicle movement, and connectivity to Kalupur Railway Station and Ahmedabad Metro, arguing that public interest outweighs minor individual inconvenience.
The appeal was filed by the Mutawalli of Mancha Masjid challenging the dismissal of his writ petition against Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation’s (AMC) decision to set back part of the mosque premises at Saraspur. The single judge had earlier held that AMC followed proper procedure under Sections two hundred ten to two hundred thirteen of the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, nineteen forty-nine (GPMC), including notice issuance and Standing Committee approval.
The division bench, comprising Justice A.S. Supehia and Justice L.S. Pirzada, observed that the main structure of the mosque was not being demolished. The Court also noted that multiple properties, including commercial, residential, and religious, were affected as part of the road widening project.
The appellant argued that the estate officer ignored his detailed representation and that the Standing Committee passed its decision without recording reasons. AMC’s counsel countered that the statutory procedure had been followed, the appellant’s belated objection was considered, and the final decision rests with the Standing Committee.
The Court stated, "We find no illegality in the single judge’s order. Section two hundred twelve mandates that the Commissioner, with Standing Committee approval, decide on demolition of buildings in the regular line of a street. Numerous properties, including the appellant’s, are included in the road widening plan."
The Court upheld the single judge’s reasoning and dismissed the appeal.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :
