Former cricketer Yusuf Pathan is a big shock, High Court rejected encroachment petition

0
48
Former cricketer Yusuf Pathan is a big shock, High Court rejected encroachment petition


Ahmedabad
The Gujarat High Court, while giving a big verdict, has termed Yusuf Pathan as encroachers. Former cricketer and current TMC MP Yusuf Pathan is accused of occupying government land. The High Court has ordered that the land be vacated soon. The petition was filed in the court on behalf of Yusuf Pathan regarding encroachment. The High Court has dismissed Pathan’s petition and termed it as encroachers.

Order to vacate Vadodara’s plot
The Gujarat High Court has found former cricketer and Trinamool Congress MP Yusuf Pathan guilty of encroachment on government land in Vadodara. The court has ordered them to vacate the disputed plot. In this decision, the court clearly stated that the celebrity cannot be above the law and giving them special discounts gives the wrong message to the society.

Single bench hearing
The verdict by a single bench of Justice Mona Bhatt, in which Yusuf Pathan’s petition was dismissed in which he sought permission to maintain possession of the government plot adjacent to his bungalow.

What did the court say?
The High Court said in its judgment that celebrities have a profound influence on the society. If they are given exemption despite breaking the law, then it weakens the public’s trust in the judicial system. The responsibility of such persons is more than common citizens.

What is the matter
This dispute started in the year 2012. Vadodara Municipal Corporation had issued a notice to Yusuf Pathan to vacate government land. Pathan challenged this notice and turned to the Gujarat High Court. He said in his petition that he and his brother Irfan Pathan should be allowed to buy that land keeping in mind the safety. He also applied to the Chief Minister of the state in this regard.

What is the attitude of the government
Yusuf Pathan’s application was sent by the Municipal Corporation to the state government, but in 2014 the government rejected the proposal for land allocation. Despite this, Pathan maintained possession of land, which led to the matter to legal action.