VASANTBHAI BABUBHAI KAMALI Vs. MINABEN CHIPAKABHAI KAMLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 10.03.2017 passed by the SSRD, Ahmedabad in Revision Application No.102 of 2016 confirming the order dated 04.05.2016 passed by the Collector, Valsad.

(2.) Brief facts leading to the present petition are that, according to the petitioner, he has a legal heirship right in the land bearing Survey Nos. 9/9, 47/1, 49/4, 5/9, 5/8, 5/7 and Survey No.30/2/1 of Mouje : Umargam, Taluka : Umargam, district : Valsad. It is the case of the petitioner that he has hereditary rights in the said property. It is the case of the petitioner that the names of the respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 were mutated by the Circle Officer by his order dated 04.02.1964 and thereafter, after the death of one Chipkabhai Naranbhai, the names of the legal heirs were mutated. By way of mutation entry No.3834 dated 21.03.1988, the said entry was certified by the Deputy Mamlatdar on 29.06.1988. The learned Principal Secretary presiding over the SSRD had found that the petitioner has filed civil suit No.30/1997. The said suit was withdrawn by the present petitioner and both the entries were challenged after a period of 38 years and 26 years. He has also observed that if there is any right, title and interest in the property, it is the civil court to decide the same and therefore, on this ground the revision application was rejected by the SSRD.

(3.) According to the learned advocate for the petitioner, both the authorities have erred in law and facts while passing the impugned orders. The authorities have not taken care of the second legal position of the law. It is contended that the petitioner had no occasion to verify the revenue records and therefore, delay is wrongly considered by the authorities. It is contended that once the name of predecessor of the petitioner was in the revenue record, then the revenue authority was obliged to enter the name of the petitioner in the revenue records.