Judgment M.R. Shah J.—By way of Special Civil Application No. 16550 of 2010, the respective petitioners of that Special Civil Application i.e. Jiviben Hansrajbhai Patel and others have prayed for the following relief: A. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus, writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents, their agents and servants to demarcate the final plot which is allotted to the petitioners and handover vacant and peaceful possession of the same to the petitioners; B. That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue writ of mandamus, writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents, their agents and servants to add 1 Acre and 10 Gunthas of land which is in the co-ownership property of the petitioners and respondent No. 4 and 5, as per the revenue entry No. 4138 and 4139, as mutated in Village Form No. 6 on 8.6.1976 and village Form No. 8-A in pursuance to the Kami Jasti Patrak of 25.2.1949; 2. Shri B.B. Naik, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners does not press the prayer in terms of Para 27 (b) and seeks permission to withdraw the present Special Civil Application unconditionally with respect of para in terms of 27(b) and has requested to consider the prayer of the petitioners with respect to prayer in terms of 27(a) only and that too TO demarcate the Final Plot Nos. 64, 68, 90 and 93 total admeasuring 63688 sq. mtrs. of land which have been allotted jointly to the original owner of the land bearing Survey No. 123. Hence, present Special Civil Application is dismissed as withdrawn unconditionally so far as prayer in terms of para 27(b) is concerned. 3. It is not in dispute that all the joint owner of land bearing Survey No. 123 i.e. Keshavji Devji Patel and Hansraj Devji Patel and Ravji Devji Patel are allotted Final Plot No. 64 admeasuring 2380 sq. mtrs; Final Plot No. 68 admeasuring 13551 sq.mtrs; Final Plot No. 90 admeasuring 10699 sq.mtrs and Final Plot No. 93 admeasuring 37058 sq.mtrs total admeasuring 63688 sq.mtrs. under the Final Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar. All the original owners are allotted the aforesaid plots jointly. mtrs; Final Plot No. 68 admeasuring 13551 sq.mtrs; Final Plot No. 90 admeasuring 10699 sq.mtrs and Final Plot No. 93 admeasuring 37058 sq.mtrs total admeasuring 63688 sq.mtrs. under the Final Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar. All the original owners are allotted the aforesaid plots jointly. Shri B.B.Naik, learned advocate for the petitioners has submitted that if a suitable direction is issued directing the appropriate authority to demarcate the Final Plot No. 64, 68, 90 and 93 as per the Town Planning Scheme, which are allotted to the respective original owners jointly, the petitioners would be satisfied, It is submitted that for inter se dispute between the parties and/ or with respect to inter se share of the parties, petitioners may initiate appropriate proceedings before the Civil Court. Therefore, petition is restricted to the aforesaid prayer of demarcation of the aforesaid Final Plots only. 4. Shri J.R. Nanavati, learned advocate for the appropriate authority has submitted that respondent authority has no objection if suitable direction is issued directing the appropriate authority to demarcate the aforesaid Final Plot Nos. 64, 68. 90 and 93, which are allotted jointly to the respective persons i.e. original owner Keshavji Devji Patel, Hansraj Devji Patel and Ravji Devji Patel. However, has requested that occupiers of original land bearing Survey No. 123 are required to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the Final Plots No. 73, 63, 65, 91 and 92, which are allotted out of the original land bearing survey No. 123 under the Final Town Planning Scheme, which the respective occupiers cannot occupy and for which Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 has been preferred. 5. Shri Viral Shah, learned advocate for the private respondent of Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 has submitted that as such some of the parties have already filed Civil Suit with respect to partition. He has also further submitted that even the dispute with respect to mutation is pending before the Revisional Authority. Therefore, it is requested to pass appropriate order considering the aforesaid fact. 6. So far as Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 filed by one Keshavjibhai Devjibhai Patel and Ravjibhai Devjibhai Patel are concerned, the same is filed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 8.5.2008 passed by the respondent No. 3 Corporation. Shri R.C. Kakkad, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the said petitioners. 6. So far as Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 filed by one Keshavjibhai Devjibhai Patel and Ravjibhai Devjibhai Patel are concerned, the same is filed for quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 8.5.2008 passed by the respondent No. 3 Corporation. Shri R.C. Kakkad, learned advocate has appeared on behalf of the said petitioners. Shri Kakkad, learned advocate for the petitioners has vehemently submitted that while preparing the Draft Town Planning Scheme as well as preparing Preliminary Town Planning Scheme lesser area of original land bearing Survey No. 123 came to be considered and consequently the respective petitioners are allotted lesser area of Final Plot and therefore, it is requested to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 08.05.2008. It is submitted that though directed by this Court, respondent No. 3 has not considered the aforesaid objection submitted by the petitioners and has not dealt with the same at all. 7. It is further submitted by Shri Kakkad, learned advocate for the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 that even the petitioners are also not handed over the peaceful and vacant possession of the Final Plot No. 90 which has been allotted to the petitioners under the Final Town Planning Scheme. It is further submitted that even the petitioners are not paid any compensation for the remaining land out of the land bearing survey No. 123, which is taken over by the appropriate authority while allotting Final Plot Nos. 73, 63, 65, 91 and 92. It is submitted that aforesaid were required to be considered by the respondent No. 3 as per the order passed by this Court dated 30.10.2006 passed in Special Civil Application No. 7806 of 1988. Therefore, it is requested to quash and set aside the impugned communication/ order dated 8.5.2008 passed by respondent No. 3 Corporation. 8. Heard the learned advocate for the respective parties at length. 9. At the outset, it is required to be noted that original land bearing Survey No. 123 was held by Keshavji Devjibhai Patel, Hansraj Devejibhai Patel and Ravjibhai Devejibhai Patel jointly. The aforesaid land bearing Survey No. 123 was included in the Town Planning Scheme No. 1 and under the Town Planning Scheme in lieu of original land bearing Survey No. 123 original plot No. 46 admeasuring 89537 sq.mtrs. was allotted. The aforesaid land bearing Survey No. 123 was included in the Town Planning Scheme No. 1 and under the Town Planning Scheme in lieu of original land bearing Survey No. 123 original plot No. 46 admeasuring 89537 sq.mtrs. was allotted. Thereafter, after Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar become final and under the Final Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar original owners of plot No. 123 are allotted Final Plot No. 64 admeasuring 2380 sq.mtrs; Final Plot No. 68 admeasuring 13551 sq.mtrs; Final Plot No. 90 admeasuring 10699 sq.mtrs and Final Plot No. 93 admeasuring 37058 sq.mtrs total admeasuring 63688 sq.mtrs. It appears that rest of the land out of the land bearing survey No. 123 is now forming part of the Final Plot No. 63 admeasuring 2400 sq.mtrs., Final Plot No. 91 admeasuring 12043 sq.mtrs., Final Plot No. 73 admeasuring 112 sq.mtrs., Final Plot No. 92 admeasuring 5998 sq.mtrs, and Final Plot No. 65 admeasuring 60 sq.mtrs and some land out of the land bearing Survey No. 123 was acquired / needed for the public road admeasuring 12823.46 sq.mtrs., total admeasuring 33436.46 sq.mtrs. 10. Therefore, under Final Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar the owners of land bearing survey No. 123 are entitled to occupy Final Plot Nos. 64, 68, 90 and 93 only which are allotted to them under the Final Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar and rest of the land out of the land bearing Survey No. 123, which are now given Final Plot Nos. 73, 63, 65, 91 and 92, which are reserved for public purpose and for road, the original owners / occupiers are required to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the same to the appropriate authority. It appears that for implementing the Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar, which has become final, the respective occupiers were served with the notices under Section 68 r/w Rule 33 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act and Rules and they were called upon to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of land bearing Survey No. 123, which are given Final Plot Nos. 73, 63, 65, 91 and 92, which are reserved for public purpose and public road and at that stage two co-owners Keshavji Devjibhai Patel and Ravjibhai Devjibhai Patel petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 have challenged the said notice by way of Special Civil Application No. 7806 of 1988on the ground that before issuing the notices under Section 68 r/w Rule 33 of the Act and Rules, the opportunity of being heard was not given to them and learned Single Judge of this Court by judgment and order dated 30.10.2006 passed in Special Civil Application No. 7806 of 1988 directed the appropriate authority to give an opportunity of being heard to those persons, which was for the purpose of enforcement of the Town Planning Scheme No. 1. Thereafter, the respective petitioners of the aforesaid Special Civil Applications were heard by the appropriate authority and thereafter the impugned order dated 8.5.2008 has been passed by the appropriate authority. 10.1. Considering the fact that the Town Planning Scheme has become final and the respective owners of original land bearing survey No. 123 are allotted Final Nos. 64, 68, 90 and 93 total admeasuring 63688 sq.mtrs. of land and the rest of the land out of the land bearing Survey No. 123 total admeasuring No. 33436.46 sq.mtrs. has been given Final Plot Nos.73, 63, 65, 91 and 92, the respective occupiers / original land owners of land bearing survey No. 123 are required to hand over the peaceful and vacant possession of the Final Plot No. 73, 63, 65, 91 and 92, which are reserved for public purpose and the rights of the respective parties are to be determined as per the re-constitute plots under the Final Town Planning Scheme. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that order passed by the appropriate authority dated 8.5.2008 is in any way illegal and / or contrary to the provision of law. The aforesaid notice has been issued for implementing of the Town Planning Scheme which has become final. Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that order passed by the appropriate authority dated 8.5.2008 is in any way illegal and / or contrary to the provision of law. The aforesaid notice has been issued for implementing of the Town Planning Scheme which has become final. Even as per the earlier order passed by this Court in Special Civil Application No. 7806 of 1988, and as observed by the learned Single Judge the legality and validity of the Town Planning Scheme, which has become final, is not required to be considered at all and the hearing was required to be given only with respect to enforcement of scheme, which has become final. Under the circumstances, contentions and objections raised by the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 with respect to measurement of the original land bearing survey No. 123 etc. cannot be considered at this stage now. Even considering the earlier order passed by this Court, legality and validity of the Town Planning Scheme was not required to be considered at all and it was only for the enforcement of the Town Planning Scheme. Under the circumstances, on the aforesaid ground and the objections raised by the petitioner of Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 the order passed by the appropriate authority dated 8.5.2008 is not required to be quashed and set aside. 11. Now, so far as grievance made by the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 with respect to not handing over the peaceful and vacant possession of Final plot which are allotted to the original land owner is concerned , the same has nothing to do with the order passed by the appropriate authority dated 8.5.2008 and notice issued under Section 68 r/w Rule 33 of the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act and Rules. If petitioners, have any other grievance with respect to not handing over the peaceful and vacant possession of the final plots which are allotted to them, it will be open for the petitioners and/ or original allottees to make grievance with respect to same by instituting independent proceedings which may be considered in accordance with law and on merits and for the same this Court has not expressed anything on merits. 12. 12. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, Special Civil Application No. 16550 of 2010 is hereby disposed of with respect to prayers in terms of para 27 (a) only by directing the appropriate authority to demarcate the Final Plot Nos. 64, 68, 90 and 93 which are jointly allotted to the owners of land bearing Survey No. 123 which are allotted to them under the Final Town Planning Scheme No. 1, Jamnagar at the earliest but not later than four weeks from today. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything with respect inter se rights of the respective parties with respect to aforesaid land and same are to be determined by the appropriate forum/ Court as in lieu of original land bearing Survey No. 123 the aforesaid Final Plot Nos. 64, 68, 90 and 93 are jointly allotted to the original owners of land bearing Survey No. 123. 13. For the reasons stated above, Special Civil Application No. 7732 of 2008 fails and same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs. P P P P P