Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/359320/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3593 of 2008
=========================================================
NATHUMIYA
SABUMIYA - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 7 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
JS YADAV for
Petitioner(s) : 1, MR
SATYAM CHHAYA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, 8,
Respondent(s) : 2 - 7
SERVED .
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 11/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
Heard
the learned advocates appearing for the parties.
The
petitioner has challenged the order dated 1st September,
2007 passed by the Joint Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department,
Government of Gujarat. By the said order, revision application of the
petitioner came to be turned down.
Father
of the petitioner Sabumiya Muradmiya Sindhi was given Government
land for personal cultivation on new tenure. One of the conditions of
the grant of the land was that the grantee should cultivate the land
personally on new and impartable tenure. It appears that the father
of the petitioner gave a declaration before the Talati that due to
oversight names of his brothers have not been entered into the land
and the same are, therefore, required to be rectified. The
authorities, finding that the father of the petitioner has breached
the condition of grant, initiated proceedings for cancelling the
grant. Ultimately, the said proceedings culminated into the Joint
Secretary passing the impugned order. In the impugned order, the
Joint Secretary recorded that on the agreement and upon the statement
of the original grantee, names of Fatehmahmad Muradmiya and others
were entered into the revenue records. Thus, there was breach in the
condition of grant. He, therefore, uphold the order of the
authorities below cancelling the grant.
From
the material on record, the relevant facts seem clear. As noted, the
land was given to the father of the petitioner for his personal
cultivation on new tenure basis. Despite this, the father of the
petitioner gave a declaration before the Talati that names of his
brothers are required to be entered into the revenue records. The
action of the authorities is, therefore, right in finding that the
important condition of the grant, namely, that of cultivating the
land personally was breached. There is, therefore, no illegality in
the impugned order.
Learned
advocate Shri Yadav for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
was minor at the relevant time. He is otherwise a blind person. He is
the only son of his father.
Under
the circumstances, even after upholding the orders passed by the
authorities below, it will be open for the petitioner for re-grant of
the land and it will also be open for the Government to consider the
same.
Subject
to the above observations, petition is disposed of. Notice is
discharged.
(Akil
Kureshi, J.)
/moin
Top