Yusuf Pathan, former cricketer and TMC MP, has approached the Gujarat High Court challenging a notice from Vadodara Municipal Corporation to remove alleged encroachment on a disputed plot he claims to possess for over a decade. Pathan argues the VMC should have issued a show-cause notice considering the prolonged dispute and his current possession.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Vadodara, Gujarat: Former Indian cricketer and newly-elected Trinamul Congress (TMC) Member of Parliament (MP), Yusuf Pathan, has approached the Gujarat High Court to contest a notice issued by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC). The notice demands the removal of an alleged encroachment on a plot of land that Pathan claims is under his possession.
Pathan’s petition highlights that the issue has been lingering for over a decade. He contends that given the long-standing nature of the matter and his current possession of the plot, the VMC should have issued a show-cause notice instead of a direct order to “clear the encroachment” and vacate the VMC-owned land.
Pathan’s legal argument emphasizes-
“The Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC) should have afforded him an opportunity by issuing a show-cause notice instead of a directive to ‘clear the encroachment’ and vacate the VMC-owned plot.”
Furthermore, Pathan points out that the Gujarat government had rejected the VMC’s proposal to sell the land to him in 2014. He argues that the state government does not have the authority to deny the sale since the land belongs to the civic body and not the state.
The petition, presented by senior advocate Yatin Oza on Pathan’s behalf, was heard by a single judge bench of Justice Sangeeta Vishen. During the hearing, Oza reiterated that the VMC’s action was unfair and that Pathan should have been given an opportunity to explain his side through a show-cause notice. He stated-
“The Gujarat government, having refused the Vadodara Municipal Corporation’s 2014 proposal to sell the land to Pathan, cannot reject the sale on the grounds that the land belongs to the civic body and not the state government.”
Justice Sangeeta Vishen, after considering the arguments, directed the VMC’s lawyer to present the civic body’s perspective in the next hearing, which is scheduled for Friday. This directive indicates the court’s intention to thoroughly examine both sides of the dispute before arriving at a decision.
former Indian cricketer and newly elected Member of Parliament Yusuf Pathan has been served an encroachment notice by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC). The notice, sent on June 6, comes just two days after Pathan’s electoral victory from the Baharampur constituency in Murshidabad district, West Bengal.
Pathan, who resides in the Tadalja area of Vadodara, has been accused of encroaching on a plot of land adjacent to his residence, a plot that the VMC claims belongs to them. The timing of this notice has sparked controversy, with allegations of political motivations behind the move.
Pathan’s lawyer, Oza, has suggested that the timing of the notice is suspicious, linking it directly to Pathan’s recent election as a TMC MP.
“The VMC took no action for 10 years and issued a notice just two days after the poll results.”
-Oza pointed out, implying a political vendetta due to Pathan’s affiliation with the Trinamool Congress (TMC).
When Oza attempted to imply that the notice was served because
“his party is different,”
-Justice Vishen intervened, advising the lawyer to stick to the core issue at hand.
According to case details, the disputed plot is a residential land parcel owned by the VMC. Pathan had expressed interest in this plot back in 2012, given its proximity to his house. He had even offered to purchase it at the market rate. The VMC cleared the proposal to sell the land to Pathan in 2014. However, the final approval, which rests with the state government, was never granted. Despite this, Pathan has remained in possession of the land since then, according to Oza.
The crux of the legal argument presented by Oza revolves around the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act (GPMC Act). He contended that under this Act, the final authority on such matters lies with the corporation, not the state government, provided the land in question belongs to the civic body.
“According to the Gujarat Provincial Municipal Corporations Act (GPMC Act), the municipal corporation, rather than the state government, holds the ultimate authority in matters concerning land owned by the civic body.”
-Oza argued.
Oza further argued that the VMC had originally decided to allot the plot to Yusuf Pathan and his brother, Irfan Pathan, in recognition of their contributions to Indian cricket. Both brothers were part of the national team when the proposal was initially cleared.
“The VMC should have allocated the land once it had approved the proposal.”
-he insisted.
ALSO READ: BJP Appeals Against Calcutta High Court Ruling on Derogatory Ads Targeting TMC
Expressing his frustration over the delay and the sudden notice, Oza stated-
“They (VMC) should not have sought approval from the state government. The issue has resurfaced after 10 years, and instead of a show-cause notice, a direct notice has been issued now. According to the law, state government approval is unnecessary. VMC acknowledged in the notice that I am in possession of this land. I request that this notice be considered a show-cause notice. Otherwise, bulldozers will arrive.”