In a significant decision, the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority (AUDA) has scrapped a proposed 18-metre-wide road that was part of a draft town planning scheme. The move came after the Gujarat state government intervened, ordering a review of the road's necessity following serious concerns that its construction would endanger a college's official affiliation.
Government Order Leads to Road Cancellation
The controversial road was initially part of the development plan (DP) and was later incorporated into the draft of Town Planning (TP) Scheme No. 2 for the Mahemdabad–Khatraj area. This scheme was prepared under the established Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act of 1976. While the state government granted its approval to the overall draft scheme on May 16, it simultaneously issued a crucial directive to AUDA. The government instructed the urban development body to critically examine the need for this specific road, which was designed to pass through two final plots.
College's Athletic Track at the Heart of the Dispute
The land earmarked for the road belongs to the Gayatri Kelavani Mandal of Nadiad, which operates a degree college for physical education on original plot number 192. A key facility on this site is a 400-metre athletics track. This track is not merely a sports facility; it is an essential academic requirement for the college and is critical for maintaining its affiliation with the relevant educational authorities.
The proposed road's alignment would have cut directly across this vital track. Recognizing the existential threat to their institution, the college management made a formal representation to the authorities. They argued persuasively that any disruption to the athletic facility would lead to the cancellation of the college's affiliation. Acting on this compelling representation and the state government's earlier directive, AUDA decided to drop the road proposal entirely.
Scrutiny Reveals Additional Errors in TP Scheme
The detailed examination triggered by the road controversy uncovered several other irregularities within the draft TP scheme. The audit found that AUDA had allocated certain final plots in zones that differed from their original designated zoning, a clear violation of standard town planning norms.
Furthermore, a survey number that was actually marked as a water body was incorrectly shown as land owned by AUDA. The review also identified a need for amendments to preserve the correct alignment of a minor canal that passes through the area covered by the scheme. These findings point to a need for more rigorous checks in the planning process.
The episode highlights the complex balance between urban infrastructure development and the protection of existing educational institutions. It also underscores the importance of thorough verification in the town planning process to avoid costly and disruptive errors.
