Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/630420/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6304 of
2008
=========================================================
BHARATIBEN
GOVINDBHAI PATEL & 4 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 4 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
AB MUNSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 5.
MR JK
SHAH, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) :
1 - 5.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 21/08/2008
ORAL ORDER
1. Petitioners
have purchased land bearing block No.237/1 and 237/2 of Village:
Danti, Tal. Jalalpur, District: Navsari by registered sale-deed dated
9.4.2004 from respondent No.5 herein. It is this land which the State
Authorities have taken possession on 10.4.2008 pursuant to notice
dated 26th March, 2008 treating as excess agricultural
land in the hands of respondent No.5. The case of the State is that
respondent No.5 had lost proceedings under Agriculture Land Ceiling
Act right up to the High Court and Special Civil Application No.11238
of 1994 came to be dismissed by learned Single Judge of this Court by
an order dated 1st February, 2007. Even when the said
petition was pending and order passed by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal was
holding the field, said respondent No.5 sold the lands to petitioners
herein.
2. Learned
advocate, Shri Munshi, for the petitioners stated under instructions
that petitioners have already preferred Letters Patent Appeal against
the said order of the learned Single Judge. They are also in the
process of filing application for leave to appeal since they were not
parties in the said proceedings before the learned Single Judge. He
submitted that for want of availability of some of the petitioners,
filing of such application may take some time.
3. Learned
advocate for the petitioners further pointed out that while issuing
notice on 17.4.2008, this Court had ordered the respondents to
maintain status-quo with respect to the land in question. He
submitted that the petitioners be granted some breathing time to
pursue their Letters Patent Appeal and the Government may be
prevented from alloting the land in question to any other person.
4. In
view of the fact that the petitioners have already preferred an
appeal against the decision of the learned Single Judge in the
Agriculture Land Ceiling proceedings, learned advocate for the
petitioner does not press this petition. His prayer for continuing
interim protection granted by this Court by an order dated 17.3.2008
for some time is, however, accepted.
5. The
respondent shall continue to maintain status-quo till 20th
September, 2008.
6. Upon
the said direction, learned advocate for the petitioners seek
permission to withdraw the petition without prejudice to the rights
and contentions of the petitioners in the LPA filed by them.
7. Petition
is disposed of accordingly. Notice discharged.
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
ashish//
Top