(1.) Learned advocate Mr.Puj appearing for the petitioner has tendered the draft amendment. The same is allowed in terms of draft. The respondent No.5 is directed to be deleted from the array of the parties. Registry to accordingly delete the name of respondent No.5.
(2.) At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Puj appearing for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Evergreen Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. Vs. Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, reported in 1991 (1) GLH 155 and has submitted that the issue is squarely covered since the authorities have travelled beyond the scope of their jurisdiction. He has submitted that the impugned orders, being violative of the law enunciated by this Court, are required to be set aside.
(3.) The brief facts are that the petitioner has purchased 12,141 sq. mts. of land from Revenue Survey No.106 admeasuring around 23,674 sq. mts. from Lavar Velabhai Hargovanbhai situated at Village Joravargadh, Taluka Santalpur, District Patan by way of a registered sale deed dated 17.08.2012 having Registration No.819 for a valid consideration. Thereafter, Entry No.666 dated 17.08.2012 came to be mutated in the revenue record on the basis of the sale deed entered into between the petitioner and Lavar Velabhai Hargovanbhai, but the respondent No.4 - Mamlatdar cancelled the said entry vide order dated 08.01.2013 by observing that the subject land is admeasuring 23,674 sq. mts. and after sale of 12,121 sq. mts. in favour of the petitioner, the remaining land becomes a fragmented land, which is in violation of the provisions of the Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 ("the Fragmentation Act"). It is stated in the order that the petitioner has not produced proof of his being an agriculturalist of the competent authority. The Mamalatdar has further observed in the order that there were two entries for registration of encumbrances in the revenue record, for which no proof was produced for release of the same and, therefore, the sale transaction does not appear proper.