Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/950820/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9508 of 2008
=========================================================
VISHAL
INDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVESERVICE SOCIETY LTD. PART - II - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 5 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
NV GANDHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR SATYAM CHHAYA, AGP for Respondent(s) :
1,
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
6.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 22/07/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
learned advocate Shri Gandhi for the petitioner and learned AGP Shri
Chhaya for the Government of advance copy.
The
petitioner has challenged an order dated 30.5.2008 passed by the
Secretary(Appeals) Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat in a
revision application filed by the petitioner. The petitioner is a
cooperative society. In the revision application before the
Secretary, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 11.10.1989
passed by the Collector, Surat. By the said order, Collector was
pleased to, in exercise of suo motu powers, set aside the alleged
auction sale of agricultural land of vilalge Majura, Taluka
Choryashi which the petitioner had claimed to have purchased as a
highest bider.
In
the said order, Collector noted that no papers of the proceedings of
the auction are found. It therefore, appears to be a bogus order of
confirmation of sale. The Collector also observed that the
agricultural land was allowed to be purchased by non agriculturist
through auction. It was also noted that though earlier land owner
was granted exemption from application of the provisions of Urban
Land Ceiling and Regulation Act, on account of breach in the
condition of such exemption, the exemption was cancelled by the
Government. Considering all these aspects of the matter, the
Collector passed the said order which came to be challenged by the
petitioner before the Revenue Secretary. Revenue Secretary also in
his impugned order noted that the revision is filed after 19 years
without properly explaining the delay. The Secretary was also
pleased to come to similar conclusions about the nature of auction
as those recorded by the Collector.
I
have no reason to take a different view. The land was originally an
agricultural land allowed to be retained by the land owner despite
application of the ULC Act. Such exemption however, came to be
cancelled on account of breach of conditions. The so-called auction
is not found reflected on record. All these factors would convince
me not to entertain the petition.
Learned
advocate Shri Gandhi however, submitted that the petitioner is a
cooperative society. The land was thereafter sub-plotted and members
were occupying the land since years. In the Town Planning Scheme
also, this position is reflected. He therefore, submitted that
whatever penalty, premium etc. that the Government may legally fix,
the petitioner would seek regularization of the possession along
such terms.
Therefore,
even while dismissing the petition, liberty is kept open to the
petitioner to approach the Government with appropriate request in
this regard which shall be considered in accordance with law.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(raghu)
Top