Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: common plot in Indranagar Cooperative Housing ... vs State Of Gujarat & 3 on 2 February, 2016Matching Fragments
HC-NIC Page 20 of 33 Created On Thu Feb 04 02:04:45 IST 2016 (18) In order to appreciate the contentions raised by the learned advocate for the petitionerSociety it would be appropriate to refer to the first layout plan dated 11.06.1972 (at AnnexureB to the petition). Said layout plan was sanctioned by District Development Officer, Ahmedabad. Said layout plan shows that 17 subplots were there with a common plot and frontage of the petitionerSociety was 200 mtrs. Gandhinagar road, which is a highway. Similarly, on perusal of the revised layout plan it appears that the tenements were increased from 17 (in the first approved layout plan) to 23. On further perusal of the revised layout plan, though it appears that 20 mtrs. Neliya road is shown the said road is not of the ownership of the petitioner Society. Taking base of the approved plan it appears that on the front of the petitioner Society there is 200 mtrs. Gandhinagar Highway. In between the tenement Nos.18 and 17 there is 20 ft. approach road and similarly 20 ft. approach road is provided at every interval, which has direct access to the road, which is mentioned in the Gandhinagar Highway. Said layout plan clearly indicates even the boundary of the final plot. It is also found from the HC-NIC Page 21 of 33 Created On Thu Feb 04 02:04:45 IST 2016 revised approved plan that there are internal roads provided between two plots, between 2021 and 1819, similarly between 1415 and 1617 etc. and at every stage such subdivisions are made. The approved layout plan clearly shows that right from Plot No.6 to the North to it at the top i.e. Plot No.19 there is a clearcut margin land provided and after the margin land the boundary to the land belonging to the petitionerSociety is shown. Neliya Road is beyond the same. There is nothing on record to show that the original owners from whom the petitionerSociety purchased the land in the year 1965 had any right over the Neliya. In fact the petitionerSociety has stated in the petition that the same belongs to the State Government. That there is nothing to show that the petitionerSociety has constructed dwellings after obtaining any permission to construct, however, it is not necessary for this Court to inquire into it further and it is an admitted position that the petitionerSociety has filed the applications as well as this petition only when the scheme is at the stage of implementation, without raising any objections whatsoever as observed hereinabove.