Supreme Court Asks Gujarat HC To Decide On Merits Tushar Gandhi's Plea Challenging Sabarmati Ashram Redevelopment Plan

Court room exchange

In the hearing today, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising submitted that the High Court ought not to have dismissed the matter in a summary manner.

The Bench, taking into consideration the fact that the High Court had disposed of the matter without any counter from the opposite side, suggested for relegating the matter back to the High Court.

Appearing for the State, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta termed the petition before the High Court and Supreme Court to be based on unverified apprehensions. He added that as far as State was concerned, the intention was to retain, protect and preserve the sanctity of Mahatma Gandhi.

"The legacy of Mahatma Gandhi should be retained, protected, preserved with the same with sanctity. Entire petition before the HC and before your lordships is based on unverified apprehensions", submitted Mr Mehta.

The SG added that the area comprising Mahatma Gandhi's Ashram was only 5 acres but the real ashram land was of 300 acres. It was also his contention that the 5 acre land was not to be touched but only the the 2/3 buildings that were dilapidated required reconstruction.

SG also submitted that there were encroachments which required to be removed.

"Mr Mehta, place this on record before the HC. Let the High Court be apprised," remarked Justice Chandrachud.

SG Mehta at this juncture sought time to respond till Monday. On SG seeking time, Senior Advocate Indira Jaising said, "If your lordships are giving him time, then I want to say that we are concerned with the entire 300 acres here."

"We are not commenting on the merits. We're looking at the judgment of the HC. Since HC has dismissed the plea summarily without an affidavit of the government, we'll set aside the order of the High Court without expressing any opinion. We'll leave it to the HC to take an appropriate view after hearing the parties," the bench suggested at this juncture.

Terming the bench's suggestion as, "fair", Senior Counsel further said, "Fair way of dealing with the matter. Real problem is that petion was disposed of without the affidavit from the other side".

On SG's request the bench agreed to take up the matter at 2:00 PM. 

When the matter was taken up at 2:00, the Solicitor General agreed to the suggestion that the matter be sent back to the High Court for decision on merits. Jaising requested that the High Court be requested to hear the matter on priority basis before the closure for summer vacations on May 7. The Solicitor General said that he won't oppose the request for priority hearing and said that it was in the interest of the State as well that the matter was decided at the earliest.

Jaising advanced a request that the High Court should be asked to send notices to the respondent-trusts as well. Objecting to this, the SG submitted that a constitutional court cannot be asked to whom notices should be sent. 

Details Of The Petition

The present petition has stated that the Government of Gujarat through its 2019 order publicised their intent to redesign and redevelop the said Ashram to make it into a "world class museum" and "tourist destination".

The Petitioner has expressed his fear that the project will change the physical structure of Sabarmati Ashram and corrupt its "pristine simplicity" that embodies the ideology of Gandhiji.

The petitioner has expressed his apprehension stating that with the nature of redevelopment and over-sized involvement of the government authorities in the conception and execution of the project, the ashram may lose the Gandhian ethos.

According to the petitioner, the said project is diametrically opposed to Mahatma Gandhi's personal wishes, according to his written instruction dated 30.09.1933 Sabarmati Ashram should be treated as Gandhiji's will.

Case Title: Tushar Arun Gandhi vs State of Gujarat & Ors| Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.2181/2022