Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/4937/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 4937 of 2010
======================================
PARMAR
USHAKUMARI NIRMALSINHJI
POA
-KARANSINH N PARMAR & ANOTHER
Versus
SPECIAL
SECRETARY (APPEALS) & OTHERS
======================================
Appearance :
MR
HRIDAY BUCH for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2, 2.2.1, 2.2.2,2.2.3
Mr
Nikhil Raval, Assistant
Government Pleader for
Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1,1.2.1 -
5.
MR JV JAPEE for Respondent(s) : 4 -
5.
======================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 09/09/2010
ORAL
ORDER
Rule.
Mr Nikhil Raval waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No.1
and Mr J.V. Japee waives service of notice of Rule for respondent
Nos.4 and 5.
The
land bearing Survey No.551 and 552 of village Kalol, Taluka
Khedbrahma, District Sabarkantha was gifted to the petitioners . On
the basis of the family arrangement mutation entry No.1792 was
mutated in favour of the petitioners and the same was certified in
the name of the petitioners in Village Form No.6. Thereafter,
respondent No.4, sister of petitioner No.1 filed appeal before Deputy
Collector, Sabarkantha against the said entry. After hearing the
parties Deputy Collector, Sabarkantha ordered cancellation of entry
No.1792.
Feeling
aggrieved, the petitioners filed revision application being Revision
Case No.73 of 2004 before the Collector, Sabarkantha, which was also
dismissed. The petitioners have challenged the said order by
filing Revision Application No.MVV/HKP/SABAR/19/05 before the Special
Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department. The Special Secretary
(Appeals), Revenue Department, also rejected the revision application
without hearing the advocate for the petitioners.
Heard
the learned counsel for the parties. Since the order passed by the
Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, is without hearing the
learned counsel for the petitioners, the same is quashed and set
aside. The Secretary (Appeal), Revenue Department shall pass a
fresh order after affording opportunity of hearing on any suitable
date in the first week of October 2010. Both the parties will
cooperate with the Secretary (Appeals). It is made clear that this
Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the
impugned order is set aside only on the ground that though the
application of the petitioners was received before the impugned
decision, the petitioners have not been given chance of hearing.
With
the aforesaid observations and directions, petition is disposed of.
Rule is made absolute accordingly.
(K.S.Jhaveri,
J.)
*mohd
Top