NATWARBHAI JIVANBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant being aggrieved of the judgement and order dated 8.10.1999 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.5239 of 1996 filed the present Letters Patent Appeal challenging the same on various grounds, such as, that the learned Single Judge has erred in law in holding that on account of Urban Land Ceiling Repeal Act 15 of 1999 the petition filed herein stands abated.

(2.) Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge has committed an error in holding that,

(3.) Mr.Hava, learned advocate submitted that the learned Single Judge also committed an error in holding that the proceedings under sec.21 of the Principal Act, which were pending before the competent authority immediately before commencement of this Act, will also abate in view of sec.4 of the Repeal Act. Mr.Hava submitted that in fact the State Government had granted exemption to the land bearing survey no.43/1 under sec.20. Therefore, the said land was excluded from the 'holdings' of the petitioner and on that basis the competent authority had passed an order dated 16.10.1987. It is against this order of the competent authority that the State Government filed a revision application under sec.34 of the Urban Ceiling Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The Government vide order dated 22.2.21989 was pleased to quash the order passed by the competent authority dated 16.10.1987 and remanded the matter to the competent authority for deciding afresh. The competent authority on remand passed the impugned order dated 19.10.1989 and declared the land admeasuring 5244.97 square meters out of survey no.43/1 as surplus land. This order was passed on the basis of information received by the competent authority from the State Govt. that agricultural exemption granted to the petitioner regarding survey no.43/1 was cancelled. The petitioner had filed a revision application against the order dated 19.10.1989, which was rejected by an order dated 20.10.1985. The proceedings under sec.34 were closed. The petitioner had submitted a scheme under sec.21 of the Act with respect to the land bearing survey no.43/1 which was rejected by the competent authority on 5.9.1985. Against this order the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Urban Land Tribunal under sec.33 of the Act. The Tribunal by its order dated 30.9.1996 set aside the order of the competent authority and directed to restore the petitioner's claim under sec.21 to the file for consideration on merits. Mr.Hava submitted that the learned Judge was pleased to hold that even those proceedings under sec.21 will abate in view of sec.4 of the Repealing Act, which results into denial of judicial scrutiny of the orders passed by the authorities.