Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/3469/2009 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3469 of 2009
=========================================================
LAXMIBEN
WD/O DHULABHAI MAGANBHAI PATEL & 7 - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 10 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
SANJAY D SUTHAR for
Petitioner(s) : 1 - 8.
MR NIKUNT RAVAL ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 1 - 5.
MR
MANISH J PATEL for Respondent(s) : 6 -
11.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 24/02/2010
ORAL
ORDER
By
way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioners have prayed for appropriate writ, order and/or
direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order
dtd.19/7/2008 passed by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department,
State of Gujarat in Revision Application No.6 of 2008 in rejecting
the revision application on the ground of delay of two years.
At
the outset, it is required tobe noted that the order which was
challenged before the Secretary (Appeals) was the order passed by
the Collector, Mehsana dtd.5/1/2006 in dismissing the Revision
Application No.9 of 2005 which was filed after a period of six
years. Thus, first there was a delay of six years in preferring the
revision application before the Collector, Mehsana and thereafter
even after dismissal of the said revision application on the ground
of delay of six years, there is a further delay of two years in
preferring
the revision application before the State Government. In the facts
and circumstances of the case, it cannot be said that the revisional
authority has committed any error in dismissing the said revision
application on the ground of delay.
Even
otherwise, it is required to be noted that the dispute is with
respect to Mutation Entry in the revenue record and as held by the
Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court in catena of decisions,
entry in the revenue record does not confer any right, title or
interest in favour of person whose name is mutated in the revenue
record and if there is any dispute with respect to title between the
parties, the parties have to approach the Civil Court and necessary
entry can be made in the revenue record on the basis of the
judgement and decree by the Civil Court.
It
is reported that in the present case the petitioners have already
filed a substantive Suit for establishment of their rights, title or
interest in the land in question. Under the circumstances, necessary
entry in the revenue record of the land in question is bound to be
made on the basis of the judgement and decree that may be passed by
the Civil Court.
With
the observations and directions aforesaid, present Special Civil
Application is dismissed. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as
to costs.
[M.R.
SHAH, J.]
rafik
Top