TUSHAR ARUN GANDHI versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS

TUSHAR ARUN GANDHI versus STATE OF GUJARAT AND ORS

The High Court erred in disposing of the writ petition without calling for an affidavit in reply from the State and without allowing pleadings to be completed; the matter is required to be remanded to the High Court for completion of pleadings and fresh consideration, and therefore the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside with the writ petition restored to the High Court file.

Parties
Appellant: Tushar Arun Gandhi; Respondent(s): State of Gujarat and Ors
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
01 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal Against High Court Order in Writ Petition (pil) Under Article 226 / Decision: Appeal Allowed and Matter Remanded to the High Court; Writ Petition Restored
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court judgment set aside; writ petition restored to the file of the High Court.
Legal Topics
Article 226, Government Resolution, Judicial Review, Remand to High Court, Redevelopment of Heritage Site
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Public Interest Litigation Article 226 Government Resolution Judicial Review Remand to High Court Redevelopment of Heritage Site

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tushar Arun Gandhi

Appellant

State of Gujarat and Ors

Respondent(s)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal Against High Court Order in Writ Petition (pil) Under Article 226 / Decision: Appeal Allowed and Matter Remanded to the High Court; Writ Petition Restored

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Government Resolution dated 05.03.2021 constituting a Governing Council and Executive Council for redevelopment of Sabarmati Ashram could be challenged in public interest litigation under Article 226
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in disposing of the writ petition without calling for an affidavit in reply from the State and without allowing pleadings to be completed
  3. 3 Whether redevelopment work should be spearheaded by the trusts which presently run the Ashram and remain within their domain

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in disposing of the writ petition without calling for an affidavit in reply from the State and without allowing pleadings to be completed; the matter is required to be remanded to the High Court for completion of pleadings and fresh consideration, and therefore the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside with the writ petition restored to the High Court file.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court judgment set aside; writ petition restored to the file of the High Court.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Impugned judgment dated 25 November 2021 of the High Court set aside