Gujarat High Court Quashes Demolition Order in Land Dispute Case — Violation of Natural Justice and Property Rights. Order passed under Section 63 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 without notice or hearing set aside as arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300A of the Constitution.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-18 21:46:18

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Harishbhai Vrajlal Bathia, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order dated 19/07/2018 passed by respondent no. 3 (the Deputy Collector, Khambhalia). The petitioner's father had purchased agricultural land in Village Viramdal and other lands in Village Ramnagar, with entries duly certified in revenue records. The Deputy Collector had nullified these transactions on 17.07.1994, but the Collector allowed the revision on 05.12.1997, confirming the father's status as an agriculturist. After the father's demise, the petitioner inherited the property. The impugned order directed demolition of the property without any prior notice or opportunity of hearing. The petitioner contended that the order was malafide, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300A of the Constitution. The court noted that the order was passed ex parte without any application of mind and without following principles of natural justice. The court held that the order was unsustainable in law and quashed it, allowing the petition. The court directed that if any action is to be taken against the petitioner, proper notice and opportunity of hearing must be given.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Right to Property - Article 300A of the Constitution of India - Deprivation of Property without Authority of Law - The impugned order directing demolition of the petitioner's property was passed without any notice or opportunity of hearing, thereby depriving the petitioner of his property without the authority of law. Held that such an order is arbitrary and violative of Article 300A (Paras 5-6).

B) Administrative Law - Natural Justice - Right to be Heard - The order was passed ex parte without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, which is a fundamental principle of natural justice. Held that any order passed in violation of natural justice is void ab initio (Paras 5-6).

C) Constitutional Law - Articles 14, 19, 21 - Arbitrary State Action - The impugned order was passed without any application of mind and in a mechanical manner, amounting to arbitrary exercise of power. Held that such action violates the equality clause under Article 14 and the right to livelihood under Article 21 (Paras 5-6).

Issue of Consideration

Whether the impugned order dated 19/07/2018 passed by respondent no. 3 without issuing any notice or affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner is arbitrary, malafide, and violative of constitutional rights under Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300A of the Constitution of India.

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 19/07/2018 passed by respondent no. 3 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed not to take any coercive action against the petitioner without following due process of law and affording an opportunity of hearing.

Law Points

Natural justice
Right to be heard
Property rights under Article 300A
Arbitrary exercise of power
Violation of Articles 14
19
21
300A

Case Details

2026:GUJHC:5783

R/Special Civil Application No. 11578 of 2018

2026-01-20

Divyesh A. Joshi

2026:GUJHC:5783

Gaurav Vyas for the Petitioner, Government Pleader for Respondents No. 1,2, Rule Served by DS for Respondent No. 3

Harishbhai Vrajlal Bathia

State of Gujarat & Ors.

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order of demolition passed by the Deputy Collector.

Remedy Sought

Quashing of the impugned order dated 19/07/2018 and stay of its implementation.

Filing Reason

The impugned order was passed without notice or opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice and constitutional rights.

Previous Decisions

The Deputy Collector had nullified transactions on 17.07.1994, but the Collector allowed the revision on 05.12.1997, confirming the father's status as an agriculturist.

Issues

Whether the impugned order dated 19/07/2018 passed without notice or hearing is violative of natural justice? Whether the order is arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300A of the Constitution?

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioner argued that the impugned order was passed without any notice or opportunity of hearing, in gross violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner contended that the order was malafide, arbitrary, and without authority of law, infringing upon his right to property under Article 300A and other fundamental rights.

Ratio Decidendi

An order passed without notice or opportunity of hearing is violative of principles of natural justice and arbitrary, and cannot be sustained in law. Such an order also infringes upon the right to property under Article 300A of the Constitution.

Judgment Excerpts

The impugned order has been passed by the respondent no. 3 without issuing any notice or affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The order passed by the respondent no. 3 is arbitrary, malafide, and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21, and 300A of the Constitution of India.

Procedural History

The petitioner's father purchased agricultural land in 1985 and 1988, with entries certified. The Deputy Collector nullified transactions in 1994, but the Collector allowed revision in 1997. After father's demise, the petitioner inherited the property. The Deputy Collector passed the impugned demolition order on 19/07/2018 without notice. The petitioner filed the present writ petition on 20/01/2026.