Yusuf Pathan to ISKCON: The many characters in Vadodara auction debate

Apart from Pathan’s case, the ISKCON temple has been alleged of encroaching a nine-metre public road in the Gotri area of the city. Members of the Board asked the administration to first examine how the auction will be carried out if the valuations are approved without removing encroachments from the land.

Iskcon temple in Vadodara. (Express Photo: Bhupendra Rana)

Varsha Vyas, Chairperson of the VMC’s Standing Committee told The Indian Express that the Committee had cleared the proposal for determining the land valuations in July as part of the plans to dispose of the plots through a public auction after fixing their market value.

Vyas said, “The proposal put forth before the Standing Committee in July was for approval to decide the market value of the plots. It is the discretion of the corporation to conduct the land valuation of its own plots. The Committee only approved the valuation that had been decided and proposed.”

Vyas added that further steps for initiating the auction were yet to be brought before the Committee.

“The General Board had concerns pertaining to most of the plots. There were questions that needed some clarification, especially on how some of these lands would proceed for auction (in view of encroachments on some plots)… There were also questions on how the reserved VMC plots, that have also been evaluated, be auctioned. So, after the discussion, it was set aside and the Commissioner has been asked to reconsider and clarify the confusion that was expressed by the members. We will reconsider the proposals as they come…”

The decision has brought the long-running dispute involving Pathan’s Tandalja plot back into focus. But the controversy does not end there.

The Sujata Co-operative Housing Society has made a representation to the VMC regarding the implementation of a Town Planning scheme (Gotri-Jetalpur TP Scheme 14) and the road access to Final Plot No. 49 that is also on the auction list. The road adjoins the ISKCON complex cannot be accessed because of a wall built across it.

The Pathan plot

The 978-square-metre plot in Tandalja (TP Scheme No. 22, Final Plot No. 90) lies adjacent to the Pathan family’s landmark white bungalow, where Yusuf and his younger brother Irfan Pathan, also a former cricketer, reside with their families and parents.

In March 2012, Yusuf Pathan approached the VMC seeking allotment of the open municipal plot. The proposal was to grant him a 99-year lease without a public auction. According to the civic body’s records, the proposal moved through the Standing Committee and the General Board, and the land was valued at Rs 57,270 per square metre, placing the premium at around Rs 5.6 crore. Pathan subsequently conveyed his willingness to pay the amount.

But the proposed direct allotment required state approval because the VMC was seeking to bypass the auction process. In June 2014, the Gujarat government’s Urban Development Department rejected the proposal. The proposed allotment, therefore, never acquired final legal sanction.

Screenshot

The VMC later alleged that Pathan fenced and occupied the plot in spite of the rejection. In June 2024, days after Pathan was elected a Lok Sabha MP from West Bengal’s Baharampur constituency on a Trinamool Congress ticket, the BJP-controlled civic body issued him a notice asking him to remove the “encroachment”. Pathan challenged the notice before the Gujarat High Court.

In August 2025, a single judge upheld the government’s decision rejecting the proposed allotment. The court held that long possession without payment did not create a legal right and observed that extending special leniency to celebrities and public figures could send the wrong message.

The dispute then moved to the Division Bench. During hearings in June this year, the Bench, headed by Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, repeatedly questioned how physical possession of public land could continue without completion of allotment formalities or payment. The court orally observed that occupation of public land without legal authority could not be treated as ordinary use. Even if Pathan were eventually to secure relief under the Gujarat government’s 1999 policy concerning allotment of land to international sportspersons, the period of occupation would still have to be considered separately while assessing damages, the bench said.

When Pathan’s counsel sought time to pursue his claim under the sportsperson policy, the court granted four weeks but orally warned that delay could increase the financial liability arising from continued occupation. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for August 31.

Following the defeat of the TMC in the West Bengal Assembly elections in June, Pathan was part of a ‘rebel’ group that merged with the Nationalist Citizens Party. It is against this backdrop that the VMC’s move towards auctioning the plot drew sharp objections.

The Standing Committee had approved a valuation of Rs 2.10 lakh per square metre for the plot occupied by Pathan, putting its value at approximately Rs 20.5 crore in July this year, which is five times of what he paid the civic body in 2012.

The valuation is to form the basis for future disposal through public bidding — the formal process prescribed under rules governing municipal administration.

A senior VMC officer told this newspaper, “The decision on removal of encroachment will be subject to the directions of the HC in the case (of Yusuf Pathan). It is certain that regardless of the decision to seek fresh approval from the state government for the auction of this land and even if Pathan is allowed to participate in the auction, the charges for the occupation so far will have to be paid by him”.

Yusuf Pathan and his counsel in the case were unavailable for comment.

Questions over fairness of auction

Vishwamitri Bachao Samiti, a citizens’ action group in Vadodara that has been making regular representations seeking ‘encroachment removal’ from public plots, has argued that the VMC should not auction the plot without clearing the alleged encroachment and taking physical possession.

Advocate Shailesh Amin, a member of the citizens’ group, says, “A prospective purchaser bidding for a vacant plot knows what he is buying. A bidder entering an auction for a plot that is fenced and occupied may have to factor in the possibility of a future battle for possession. That difference can affect participation… and, ultimately, price. What should happen to the financial loss arising from the prolonged illegal occupation?”

Referring to a VMC charge of Rs 15 per square metre per day for temporary use of open TP plots, the group has calculated that the use charges for a 978-square-metre plot over approximately 14 years could amount to around Rs 7.5 crore, excluding penal interest and penalties. “This figure is the basic calculation, not an assessed municipal demand. If Pathan is willing to pay the occupancy charge for 14 years and then participate in a fair auction to legally purchase the plot, it is fine… But the issue is that the VMC has turned a blind eye to the possession of land until the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.”

The Chief Justice-led Bench has orally indicated in the previous hearing that the period of unauthorised occupation, if established, cannot simply be erased even if Pathan eventually succeeds in obtaining some benefit under a government policy.

ISKCON land dispute: A plot for sale but how to get there?

The Vishwamitri Bachao Samiti has also made a representation about a 9-metre-wide and approximately 650-metre-long TP road connecting Makrand Desai Road to ESI Road which it said has been blocked or encroached upon in the vicinity of Final Plot No. 116, where the ISKCON establishment including its restaurant is located. The group has also alleged that access to Final Plot No. 117, a VMC-owned plot reserved for public purpose, has been obstructed.

The civic body has been considering the valuation of Final Plot No. 49, measuring about 1,527 square metres, and earmarked as “Sale for Commercial” in the TP Scheme. The citizen group has contended that if the road remains blocked, the plot loses its planned public access and an auction could create a serious distortion — the plot may technically be offered to the public, but the person or institution controlling the adjoining public access could have an advantage over every other bidder.

The group’s representation is backed by a three-page letter dated July 24, 2026, from Sujata Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. to the Municipal Commissioner contending that their internal roads and residential layout lie adjacent to the proposed commercial plot. The Society has placed before the VMC the history of the TP road and its own communications with the civic authorities regarding implementation of the sanctioned scheme. Members of the temple administration said they “were unaware” about the proposals or developments and refused to comment on the matter.

The society has said, “The nine-metre road planned as part of the TP scheme has been illegally encroached upon for the last 15 years by the temple, where it has constructed a restaurant, prasad counter, kitchen and so on… Final Plot No. 49 is situated adjoining the area of Sujata Society and that the road access contemplated under the TP scheme is material to the use and development of the plot… The TP road shown in the sanctioned scheme is a separate planned public road and should be opened accordingly.”

About the Gotri plot, a senior VMC official said, “The VMC has earmarked plot No 49 for commercial sale. However, originally, this plot was part of the property of Sujata Cooperative Housing Society. When the TP-14 scheme was implemented, as per the procedure, the society had forfeited the land to the VMC. However, the proposed nine-meter road was never built… Putting up this plot for auction currently means that there is a dispute on the access road to this plot and therefore, the question has been raised.”

7 plots, one larger question

Apart from the Yusuf Pathan plot, the list included another large residential parcel in Tandalja — Final Plot No. 97, measuring 2,878 square metres and valued at Rs 1.5 lakh per square metre.

Other parcels are reserved for public or government infrastructure, including a neighbourhood centre in Akota and land in Bhayli earmarked for facilities such as a bus stand, a central health centre and a school-cum-games ground. The circumstances surrounding each parcel are different. Not every plot is alleged to be encroached upon. Nor is every parcel necessarily intended for public auction, officials say. But the General Board’s objection to the resolution for reconsideration suggests that the Corporation cannot mechanically proceed from valuation to disposal without first examining the physical and legal status of the land.

‘Unequal treatment’

The VMC’s problem is no longer confined to the question of whether Yusuf Pathan should be allowed to retain the Tandalja plot. Nor is the issue simply whether allegations concerning ISKCON’s occupation of a TP road are ultimately proved or rejected.

The citizen group’s contention of unequal treatment has added a political edge to the debate. It has contrasted the action taken against smaller encroachments with what it describes as prolonged inaction in cases involving valuable land and influential occupants.

Congress Corporator Ashish Joshi, who also opposed the valuation being approved in case of lands that were not in the possession of the VMC, said, “The issue may be politically loaded as the VMC has not blindly allowed it to be occupied for a long period of time but every encroachment case has its own title records, legal history and procedural requirements… It does not reduce the VMC’s obligation to explain why the civic property remains under disputed or alleged occupation for years while their commercial disposal as per the process is being considered now.”

Vadodara Municipal Commissioner Arun Mahesh Babu told this newspaper, “I asked the Board to send the proposal back when they had objections about the seven plots being clubbed under one proposal… We have told them we will take them up on a case-to-case basis and resubmit individual land proposals. The valuation has to be done before the auction and so we have already done that.”

The VMC therefore faces two separate issues — the process of future disposal of the plot and the consequences of its current continued “illegal” occupation.

According to a senior official, the four other plots reserved for public and government infrastructure projects — neighbourhood center in Akota, and three plots in Bhayli earmarked for an ST bus stand, a central health centre and ground for school and games — are also under question.

“Congress Opposition leader Chandrakant Shrivastav raised the question on why plots that were reserved for public infrastructure were being considered for the process of auction. Therefore, the proposals were sent back together for resolving the queries,” the officer said.