Legal Setback for Yusuf Pathan: Former Cricketer Withdraws Appeal in Vadodara Land Dispute

VADODARA – The ongoing legal battle involving former Indian cricketer and current Lok Sabha MP Yusuf Pathan has reached a new impasse. On Monday, the Gujarat High Court dismissed as withdrawn an appeal filed by Pathan, which had challenged a single-judge order labeling him an “encroacher” on a 978-square-metre plot of government land in Vadodara.

A division bench, presided over by Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice DN Ray, granted permission for the appeal to be withdrawn after Pathan’s legal counsel, Shalin Mehta, indicated that the matter would be pursued through alternative administrative channels.

The Core of the Dispute

The controversy centers on a prime plot of land owned by the Vadodara Municipal Corporation (VMC). Pathan, 43, had sought to claim the land under a specific state government policy designed to provide land allotments to international cricketers. However, the Gujarat government rejected his application, a decision that was subsequently upheld by a single-judge bench of the High Court.

Despite the rejection, Pathan continued to occupy the premises. Following his election to the Lok Sabha from the Baharampur constituency in West Bengal earlier this year on a Trinamool Congress (TMC) ticket, the VMC intensified its efforts to reclaim the property, issuing a formal notice to the cricketer-turned-politician to vacate the land.

Court’s Sharp Criticism

The legal proceedings have been marked by stern observations from the judiciary. During a hearing on June 8, the High Court expressed significant displeasure regarding Pathan’s occupation of the plot. The bench questioned how a public figure could take possession of government land without finalizing the necessary legal formalities, explicitly describing his presence on the site as an encroacher.

Furthermore, the court had previously warned that any delay in vacating the plot could result in the imposition of hefty damages against Pathan.

Moving Beyond the Courtroom

During Monday’s session, counsel for Pathan informed the bench that they had yet to receive a response from the VMC regarding their ongoing claims. “Because we are saying that there is a circular which allows international cricketers to be given a plot… I have taken instructions from my client—if it is to happen, it will happen outside the court; otherwise, it won’t happen,” Mehta submitted to the court.

With this development, Pathan’s legal challenge before the division bench has formally concluded. The resolution of the dispute now rests on Pathan’s ability to secure his claim through the state government’s policy framework, effectively moving the standoff from the courtroom to the administrative arena.