Gujarat
,
Odhav
,
Ahmedabad
Published :
Mar 2026
|
Updated :
Encroachment removal and community resistance: The Rabari settlement dispute in Ahmedabad’s Odhav area
Reported by
Suchak Patel
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Rakshit Dhingra, Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
40
Households affected
192
People affected
2015
Year started
0.18
ha.
Land area affected
40
Households affected
192
People Affected
2015
Year started
0.18
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Encroachment by Non-Right Holders (Other than Caste-based)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Unclassifed
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Encroachment by Non-Right Holders (Other than Caste-based)
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
1
Summary

Ahmedabad witnessed a fresh wave of protests as the Rabari community expressed their outrage over the demolition of their homes in the Rabari settlement of Odhav. The Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation (AMC) carried out a large-scale demolition drive on 20 January 2026, removing 40 residential houses and 20 commercial structures, reclaiming 1,833 square meters of land. However, the residents claimed that no prior notice was given before their homes were razed. They added that they have been living in the area for the past 70 years, paying taxes and electricity bills, and are not illegal encroachers.

The demolition, carried out by AMC’s East Zone Estate Department, was part of an ongoing drive to clear encroachments on government-owned plots. While the authorities maintain that legal notices were issued since 2015 and that proper demarcations were carried out in 2018 and 2019, the residents contest these claims.

The demolition in Ahmedabad’s Odhav area has sparked strong political reactions. Congress state president Shaktisinh Gohil visited the affected site and criticised the municipal corporation for using bulldozers without prior notice. In a tweet, he stated that the demolition was carried out in an inhuman manner, violating Supreme Court guidelines. He emphasised that the residents were allotted the land in 1952. Similarly, AAP Gujarat chief Isudan Gadavi condemned the move and alleged it was part of a land grab conspiracy.

Meanwhile, AMC Standing Committee Chairman Devang Dani dismissed the allegations of political vendetta. He stated that encroachment removal was carried out in the public interest and that repeated notices had been served over the years. According to Dani, the settlement was initially meant for 310 families, with designated spaces for construction and open areas. However, he claimed that residents expanded beyond their allotted spaces over time, leading to the demolition drive.

The incident highlights the ongoing conflict between urban planning and the rights of long-settled communities. While the authorities argue that encroachments need to be cleared for city development, residents contend that they have been systematically marginalised, with their homes taken away without alternative housing arrangements. The controversy raises critical questions about urban displacement, legal due process, and the accountability of municipal authorities in ensuring humane rehabilitation.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

Type of Land

Common and Private

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Residential area, Commercial

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

5
Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Legal Supporting Documents

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Author
Reported by
Suchak Patel
Suchak is an independent researcher.
Show more work
Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand for legal recognition of land rights

Complaint against procedural violations

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Status of Project

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Residential area, Commercial

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

JOIN
THE LCW COMMUNITY
Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, Quarterly Analytics report, Curated Expert talks, merchandise and much more.


Support our work.
Sign Up Today
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us