KASHIBEN GAURISHANKER Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed for quashing and setting the order passed by the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Land Tribunal and confirmed by the Dy. Collector as also by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal.

(2.) The case of the petitioner was that Joshi Manishankar Bhanji and his brothers made an application in the prescribed Form No.2 showing the lands of Village Dharuka, Timba, Tal. Umarala, District : Bhavnagar belonged to them. On receipt of the application, proceedings were initiated by the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. in accordance with the provisions of Gujarat Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act') and order was passed declaring certain lands as excess land to which the provisions of the Act would apply. It appears that since by the time Manishankar died, the order was set aside by the Dy. Collector and the matter was remanded to the A.L.T. Again, the matter was decided by the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. and the order was passed which was confirmed in Appeal as well as in Revision.

(3.) Several contentions were raised by Mr. J.M. Patel, learned counsel for the petitioners. It was submitted that the land was not irrigated land and the authorities have committed an error of law apparent on the fact of the record in treating the land as irrigated land. He also submitted that joint inquiry was held against all Khatedars which resulted into injustice and prejudice was caused to the petitioners and the orders are liable to be quashed and set aside. It was urged that in view of the death of Manishankar, proceedings were null and void and they could not have been continued thereafter. It was argued that provisions of Section 6 (3 B) have not been appreciated in their proper perspective and applied which has resulted in prejudice to the petitioners. Finally, it was submitted that two pieces of land to the extent of 7 Acres and 02 Gunthas and 26 Gunthas of Survey Numbers 20/1 and 20/2 respectively ought to have been excluded from the operation of the Act, in view of clear and categorical finding recorded by the Dy. Collector that they were sold on September 9, 1974 and the transfer was not effected with a view to defeat the provisions of the Act. On these facts, the matter deserves to be remanded to Mamlatdar and A.L.T. to decide the same afresh in accordance with law.