Gujarat High Court Issues Notice To Junagadh Municipality On Tenant's Plea For Alternative Premises After Demolition Of Paan Shop

The Gujarat High Court on Monday (December 01) issued notice to the Junagadh Municipal Corporation on a tenant's plea who has sought a decision on his representation before the corporation for allocation of an alternative premises, after his paan shop–given to him by a trust–was demolished. 

The petitioner had filed the plea challenging final show cause notice dated April 11, directing the petitioner to remove construction in question within a period of two days. The Notice was issued under 210, 211, 212, 478 of Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporation Act. 

The petitioner's counsel argued before Justice Mauna M Bhatt that during pendency of the plea challenging notice for removal, the property had been demolished. He submitted that corporation maybe asked to consider providing alternative premises as sought in his representation before the corporation. 

He said, "They(corporation) are not deciding. After taking possession, and demolition they are not concerned".

On the court's query the counsel said, "Trust was the owner of the property. I was the tenant. Instead they (corporation) issued notice to me. I brought to notice of nagarpalika that you have allocated this land to the trust...I am the tenant of trust, and I have been paying rent therefore you please approach the trust". 

When the court asked as to who made the construction, the counsel said, "Trust did. Trust sought permission for the shop. Trust made it. I am running". The counsel for the corporation said that the tenant has no locus. 

To which the petitioner's counsel said, "But I am running since 1996". To this the court orally said, "Then you go to appropriate court. How can this court establish...?". The petitioner's counsel said that the corporation should have issued notice to the trust instead of the tenant. 

He said, "Immediately opposite to my shop there is a Nagarpalika shopping centre. If they can give me (accommodation) on any condition..."

The court orally said, "How can they give you? They have to give it to owner...". The petitioner's counsel said, "I told Nagarpalika that you approach trust. Trust will give me notice for vacation". 

He further said that the corporation had issued notice to the petitioner as if it is property of corporation not trust, and the petitioner had encroached upon it. 

After hearing the matter for some time the court in its order dictated, "The petitioner is the occupier of the property named Heera Paan Centre which was given to him by a trust. The trust gave the property on rent and petitioner is paying rent regularly. The petitioner is occupying the property and it is not his own construction for which notice was issued...During pendency of the petition the property has been demolished therefore Petitioner has made representation to respondent corporation. Counsel for corporation submitted since property is demolished cause does not survive and only grievance which remains is with regard to decision on representation. Considering the submission, issue notice". 

Case title: HIRA PAAN CENTER V/S JUNAGADH MUNICIPAL CORPORATION & ORS.

R/SCA/7945/2025