Gujarat High Court Calls Asaram's Ashram 'Habitual Offender'; Upholds Eviction From Encroached Land, Riverbed

The Gujarat High Court dismissed pleas moved by 'Sant Shri Asharam Ashram' challenging revenue and eviction proceedings, for encroaching upon a large area of land and after finding that the trust had violated allotment conditions and regularization orders. Upholding the findings of the single judge, a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice DN Ray in its order said:"Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, it is evident that the petitioner – trust not only violated the conditions of the orders of allotment / regularization orders of grant of Government land, but also encroached upon a substantial area of open land surrounding the allotted lands, even the land from the riverbed, for its use and illegal occupation over the period of years. The petitioner is found to be a habitual offender, who had earlier encroached on a large area of about 51,101 sq.mtrs of open land forming part of Sabarmati river, which was proved in the eviction proceedings conducted under Section 61 of the Code in the year 2009. Even otherwise, the allegations of breach of conditions of the allotment / regularization orders have been found to be proved by the learned Single Judge as well as by us in view of the discussion made hereinabove". From the record the court noted that there was nothing which would indicate that the map of constructions was ever placed before the Collector or approved by him. It further noted that the trust had not placed on record any permission from Collector approving the "map of construction" or any permission given by Mamlatdar prior to using the land. On the trust's contention that its land was being taken over by the authorities for construction of proposed sports complex based on certain inter-departmental communications, the bench in its 80 page order, held that inter-departmental communications cannot be considered a basis for passing order for forfeiture of land under Section 79A Land Revenue Code. The communications, the bench said, may be considered merely as a part of the exercise for identifying available land for the purpose of sports complex, wherein the illegal constructions raised by the trust over the lands in question were identified and noted."We find substance in the submission of Mr. G.H. Virk, learned Government Pleader that if a Government land is allotted to a private person on the terms and conditions of the allotment order, which if violated, Sharatbhang proceedings can be initiated, at any point of time, as per the conditions of allotment itself, which permits resumption of the Government land in cases of such violations. Identification of such violations is a continuous exercise, however, any encroachment or unauthorized constructions, if identified, can be removed only by adopting due procedure of law. In the instant case, no infirmity could be shown in the legality of the proceedings conducted against the petitioner, in the Sharatbhang case proceeded under Section 79A, wherein after affording due opportunity of leading evidence and personal hearing granted to the petitioner, the order of forfeiture has been passed. All allegations of mala fide or bona fide of the respondent authority, vehemently pressed into service by the learned Senior Counsel to assail the judgment impugned are liable to be rejected outrightly," the court added. The court said that the trust had been found to be a habitual offender as it had encroached upon a large area of about 51,101 sq. mtrs. of land forming part of the Sabarmati river from which it had been evicted in the proceedings initiated in 2009 which concluded in 2013. The court noted that the trust had made further encroachment, which was subject matter of the present proceedings, and thus it did not find any good ground to issue a direction for regularization of the existing constructions, which were extensive and were covering the river bed."At the cost of repetition, it is stated that there is no question of regularization of a riverbed land encroached by the petitioner. Any such indulgence would be contrary to the decision of the Apex Court. Even otherwise, no error having been found in the concurrent findings of fact returned by the competent authorities in two proceedings under Section 79A and Section 61 of the Code, separately, wherein principles of natural justice have been duly followed, we cannot attach any infirmity to the order of the learned Single Judge in dismissing both the writ petitions, while refusing to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction of the constitutional court," the bench held. BackgroundThe appellant trust (petitioner before single judge)–Sant Shri Asharam Ashram, registered under Gujarat Public Trusts Act and undertaking charitable, educational and spiritual activities, claimed that 39,094 sq.mtrs of land at Mouje Village Motera, in Taluka Gandhinagar (now Taluka Sabarmati, District Ahmedabad) was allotted to it through orders of the State...

Gujarat High Court Calls Asaram's Ashram 'Habitual Offender'; Upholds Eviction From Encroached Land, Riverbed

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags