Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/6012/2000 4/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6012 of 2000
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
=========================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=========================================================
HIRALAL
UGRESHWAR TRIVEDI & 1 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
MEHUL H RATHOD for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.
MS MANISHA NARSINGHANI, AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE MD SHAH
Date
: 19/01/2011
ORAL
JUDGMENT
Land
bearing survey No.500/28 of Village Dhandha was declared as
Government waste land under the provisions of Bombay merged
Territories and Areas (J.A.) Act, 1953 and entry No.4 was mutated.
This was challenged by the petitioners and other persons by way of
RTS Appeal No.6 of 1965, however, it was dismissed by the Collector
on 2-4-1968. When it was carried before the Special
Secretary(Appeal) by way of revision, said revision was dismissed on
30-7-1971 directing the Collector to hold inquiry under the
provisions of Jagir Abolition Act and then to mutate fresh entry.
Thereafter on 11-5-1972, Mamlatdar, Palanpur, held that the
petitioners were the permanent holders of the land as they held the
same since long and remanded the case. Order dated 11-5-1972 of
Mamlatdar was set aside by Deputy Secretary (Appeals) and ordered
for a decision afresh. Thereafter, the petitioners were held not
entitled for the land under the Jagir Abolition Act by the Mamlatdar
vide order dated 30-4-1973 which, when challenged before the Special
Secretary, was dismissed. On 11-10-1995, the petitioner requested
for non-removal of his unauthorized occupation by approaching the
Mamlatdar, Palanpur. The petitioners in March, 1996 requested for
regularization of their land bearing Survey No.504. Said application
was rejected by the Collector, Banaskantha on 29-12-1997. They
challenged the said order before Deputy Secretary (Appeals) by way
of revision. However, it was rejected vide order dated 26-4-2000 on
the ground that land was mutated in the name of Government since
long and it was decided to allot the said land to the affected
persons of Sipu Project for rehabilitation. Hence, the present
petition.
Heard
learned advocate, Mr.Mehul Rathod for the petitioners and learned
AGP, Ms.Manisha Narsinghani for the respondents.
It
is submitted by Mr.Rathod that affected persons of Sipu Project
refused to take possession of the said land as being unsuitable and
hence, possession of the said land kept reserved for the affected
persons of Sipu Project came back to the Government. As per the
order passed by the Deputy Collector, Sipu Project, in February,
1984, it was decided that land in question was not required for
rehabilitation of affected persons of Sipu Project and hence,
Government was requested to cancel the order for allotment of said
land to the affected persons of Sipu Project. It is further
submitted that in similar type of cases, the Collector, Banaskantha,
at Palanpur vide order dated 10-5-1992 regularized the encroachment
made by other persons and order for allotment of land to the
affected persons of Sipu Project was also cancelled. Copy of said
order is placed on record from pages 27 to 36. This aspect was not
considered by the Collector while deciding the application as well
as by the Deputy Secretary (Appeals) in revision.
It
is an admitted fact that the petitioners have been in possession
over the disputed land since 1957-58 and till date, land is in their
possession. In view of the above, in the opinion of this Court, if
the orders passed by the Collector as well as Deputy Secretary
(Appeals) are quashed and set aside and matter is remanded to the
Collector for a decision afresh, ends of justice will be met.
Thus,
the orders dated 29-12-1997 passed by the Collector, Banaskantha,
and 26-4-2000 passed by the Deputy Secretary (Appeals) are quashed
and set aside and matter is remanded to the Collector, Banaskantha,
for a decision afresh. The Collector, after giving full
opportunities of producing documents and hearing, will decide the
same in light of the decision rendered qua other persons. Till such
a decision is rendered by the Collector, status quo prevailing as on
today shall remain in force. This Special Civil Application stands
disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(M.D.SHAH,J.)
radhan
Top