Gujarat High Court Issues Notice On Plea Alleging Displacement Of Persons From Land Falling In Development Project For Ambaji Pilgrimage

The Gujarat High Court recently issued notice on a plea moved by certain persons alleging proposed displacement from the land which is stated to fall in the Rs. 1200 crore Ambaji Integrated Development and Corridor Project for development of Ambaji pilgrimage located in Banaskantha. 

The petitioners have challenged the notices of eviction issued by the Mamlatdar Danta to evacuate the subject land within five days without offering alternate accommodation which the petitioners claim violates their rights under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Notably, the court had earlier asked the State to come up with some solution, pursuant to which the State had filed an affidavit informing the court the persons who have been allegedly displaced have been evaluated and are found to be eligible for grant of benefits out of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna - Gramin. The State further said that interregnum accommodation for these persons within 1 km of their present accommodation has also been envisaged. 

During the hearing on January 29, Justice Nikhil S Kariel while reviewing the Affidavit submitted by the State noted, “The said affidavit is pursuant to the oral direction of this Court to the State Government to find some appropriate solutions, more particularly since the petitioners are alleging displacement, on account of redevelopment of a temple. The said affidavit inter alia states that the petitioners have been evaluated and have been found eligible for grant of benefits out of the Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojna - Gramin. The affidavit further inter alia states that provision for interregnum stay of the petitioners within 01 km. radius of the present residential accommodation of the petitioners, which is in the nature of encroachment is also envisaged.It is also envisaged that the temple trust would provide free meals to all encroachers i.e. the petitioners twice a day, till such time the petitioners desire to avail such benefits.”

However at this stage the counsel for the petitioner's requested for time to consider the proposal adding that the petitioners would be “entitled to much more compensation/benefits” than what is offered by the State. In response to this the State's counsel withdrew the affidavit and requested that the State would thenwant to contest the petition. 

The high court while refusing to grant interim relief said, "Under such circumstances, the affidavit is returned back to the Government and whereas the following order is passed :(i) Issue Notice to the respondents returnable on 19.03.2025. (ii) In view of the aforesaid developments, interim relief is refused". 

As the petitioners' counsel requested that the petitioners would want to challenge the court's present order and so the court may stay its order for 3 weeks, the court went on to reject the request. 

The plea moved by 10 persons seeking a direction to the authorities to provide alternative accommodation under any housing scheme before they are evicted from the lands in view of the Ambaji Integrated Development and Corridor Project for development of Ambaji pilgrimage. Notably, the Gujarat Pavitra Yatradham Development Board has announced a Rs. 1200 crore for this project. 

Background

The plea states that the Gujarat Pavitra Yatradham Development Board has announced a Rs. 1200 crore 'Ambaji Integrated Development and Corridor Project' for the Ambaji Pilgrimage, hence many properties of the local residents is likely to be affected by the project. As a result, the Mamlatdar, Danta issued show-cause notice under Section 61 (Empowers revenue authorities to remove unauthorized occupants from government land) of Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 (BLRC) without offering alternative accommodation. The Petitioners in the plea contended that they have been occupying the space for the last 50 years and have paid all the taxes.

The Petitioners in their plea further stated that despite this, the final eviction notice under the Section 202 (Allows the government to enforce eviction orders and take possession of encroached land) of BLRC within five days which violates Article 14 (Right to Equality) and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution and goes against the ruling of the Apex Court in Bombay Municipal Corporation vs Olga Telis. Therefore, the Petitioners moved the High Court under Article 226 requesting for a stay on eviction and alternate accommodation. In the alternative the plea seeks status quo till a final decision is reached.

Case Title: Piraji Nemaji Rabari & Ors. vs Mamlatdar and Executive Magistrate & Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download Order