Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/7372/2008 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 7372 of 2008
=========================================================
BHAGWATI
WD/O SHANTILAL PATEL - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
VIMAL A PUROHIT for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, 1.2.4,1.2.5
MR JK SHAH
ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for
Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE NOT RECD BACK for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 21/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Rule.
Learned AGP Mr.J.K.Shah waives service of rule on behalf of the
State.
The
petitioners are owners of the land bearing Survey No.61/1 admeasuring
Are 44 ? 01 sq.mtrs of village Raman Gamdi, Taluka Vadodara. The
Deputy Collector by his impugned order dated 12.01.2006 finding that
the land in question was left fellow right from 1997-98, in exercise
of the powers under Section 65 of the Bombay
Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short ?Sthe Act??),
ordered that management of the land will be taken over by the
Government for a period of 10 years. He further directed that the
petitioners be evicted summarily in exercise of the powers under
Section 84-C of the said Act.
Learned
advocate Mr.Viral Purohit for the petitioners submitted that the
petitioners have to put the land in question to agricultural use at
least from the years 2002-03 onwards which is reflected from the
revenue records which are produced today. He submitted that in any
case for maximum period of 10 years the Government can resume the
management of the land under Section 65 of the Act. The Deputy
Collector has without assigning any reason, ordered taking over the
management of the land for the maximum period.
Learned
AGP Mr.J.K.Shah on the other hand submitted that the order passed by
the Collector calls for no interference.
From
the submissions made on behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the
material on record, I find that the petitioners are required to be
given an opportunity to point out all the facts to the Deputy
Collector. If the petitioners make out a case that the land has been
put to actual agricultural use at least from 2002 onwards, it would
be a case for either reduction of the period for which the management
of the land is ordered to be taken over by the Government or even for
reconsideration of the entire issue.
For
this purpose, the impugned order 12.01.2006 (Annexure-C) is quashed.
The Deputy Collector shall pass a fresh order after giving
opportunity of being heard to the petitioners. It would be open for
the petitioners to produce additional documents or other relevant
material in support of their case.
With
these directions, the petition is disposed of.
Rule
is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
Direct
Service is permitted.
(
Akil Kureshi, J. )
kailash
Top