Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: common open plot in Bapunagar Morarjichowk Hitrakshak ... vs State Of Gujarat on 23 March, 2022Matching Fragments
11.1 Mr. Hakim would further submit that with regard to the land in question, Civil Suit No.4856 of 1989 was filed in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad with similar type of prayers. The GHB filed its written statement and stated that the land in question was transferred to Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation as per the minutes drawn in the meeting held way back on 21.3.1963 and, therefore, neither the Corporation nor GHB can now state contrary to what was stated on oath before the City Civil Court way back in the year 1989. He has taken us through the written statement dated 4.10.1989 of GHB filed in the suit and produced along with the petition, particularly, paragraph 9 (d). He would submit that the land in question was given to Gujarat Labour Welfare Board on rent basis and the written statement filed by Gujarat Labour Welfare Board wherein it has been categorically stated that the land in question is being used for playground since long time for nearby residents. The Gujarat Labour Welfare Board has also stated in its written statement that if any construction is permitted, common plot in question be kept open for the cultural activities in the interest of general public of that area. He would further submit that as and when public notice was issued with regard to putting C/WPPIL/50/2015 CAV ORDER DATED: 23/03/2022 up construction of Lower Income Class Group II and Middle Income Group 1 upon the land in question, a detailed representation has been made stating all these aspects. However, evasive reply was given by GHB that some mistakes were committed showing the land in question as playground and in fact, the authorities with malafide intention started taking steps to correct the so-called mistake committed in the revenue records, Town Planning Scheme etc. and hence, the so-called correction has been made only after filing of the petition and by that, the respondent authority jointly are trying to deprive the residents of surrounding area to use an open place which was used as a playground for various activities. He, therefore, would submit that the petition may accordingly be allowed and appropriate writ may be issued by directing the respondents not to put up any construction upon the land in question.