RAMJIBHAI MAVJIBHAI MALAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the petitioners for an appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the order dt. October 28, 1987 passed by the Collector, Junagadh -respondent no.2 herein and also an order dt. December 31, 1988 passed by the State Government in revision application which has caused prejudice to the petitioners.

(2.) The case of the petitioner was that he was the owner of the land bearing Survey No. 83 admeasuring 1 Acre - 34 Gunthas situated in the city of Veraval. The land belonged to the wife of the petitioner no.1 and mother of the petitioner nos. 2 to 6. After the death of wife of petitioner no.1, the land was mutated in the name of all the petitioners and thus they became co-owners. As stated by the petitioners, there was a Town Planning Scheme for the city of Veraval, wherein the land bearing Survey No.83 was covered. In view of the Town Planning Scheme, an application made by the petitioners for conversion of the land into non-agricultural, was not granted at the relevant time by the Collector, Junagadh. The petitioners have stated that they came to know that Survey No.83 was given final plot Nos. 284, 285 and 54. According to the petitioners, actual and physical possession of final plot Nos. 284 and 285 was given to the petitioners but not of final plot No.54. For final plot No. 284, permission for Non-Agricultural use was granted on November 7, 1984, whereas for final plot No.285, such permission was granted on 15th October, 1984 on certain terms and conditions. One of the terms and conditions provided that the petitioners must start construction work within a period of three months from the grant of permission and the construction must be completed within three years. It appears that inspite of clear conditions, the petitioners neither started the construction, nor completed the same within the stipulated period. In the circumstances, a notice was issued on 14th March, 1987 (Annexure: G to the petition), asking the petitioner to show cause why Non-Agricultural permission should not be cancelled and appropriate proceedings should not be initiated for breach of the terms and conditions by the petitioners. The Collector, vide his order dt. October 28, 1987, held that the petitioners had committed breach of conditions of construction. It may be appropriate to state at this stage that the petitioners approached the Collector and prayed for extension of time which was granted. At the time of hearing also, they prayed for further time stating that there were communal riots and drought in the intervening period. The Collector accepted the case of the petitioners and recorded specific findings that in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was reasonable to extend time and accordingly, the time was extended for further period of one year on condition that the petitioners must start construction on or before November 30, 1987. The said order was passed on October 28, 1987. Thus, under the order passed by the Collector, the petitioners were required to start construction work within about one month and to complete the same within one year.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the above order, the petitioners preferred revision application before the State Government. The State Government, in the revision application observed that if the petitioners were of the view that no construction was possible, they could not have made any application for Non-Agricultural use of land. But once they made an application, it was incumbent upon them to start the construction and complete it within the stipulated period. It was not open to the petitioners thereafter to ignore the conditions imposed in the order. In the light of above observations, the Additional Chief Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, not only dismissed the revision application filed by the petitioners, but set aside the order, granting extension of time, passed by the Collector holding that it was not open to the Collector to do so. The said order is challenged in the present petition.