MOHANBHAI PREMJIBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order passed by respondent no. 1-revisional authority i.e. Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat dated 09/03/2000 in Revision Application No. 29/1997 by which the revisional authority has dismissed the Revision Application confirming the order passed by the Collector, Surat dated 11/19-09-1996 in RTS Revision Case No. 69/Vashi-1296/1995 by which the Collector in exercise of suo motu revision exercised powers under Rule 108(6) of the Land Revenue Rules and quashed and set aside the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat in RTS/Appeal 56/1992 dated 03/10/1992 and consequently directed to quash and set aside mutation entry no. 3737, which is in favour of the petitioners.

(2.) THE facts leading to the present Special Civil Application in a nutshell are as under;

(3.) BY way of further affidavit it is stated by the petitioners that as such the petitioners were agriculturist at the relevant time when the land in question was transferred in favour of the petitioners pursuant to the will executed by the original owner. It is further submitted that in fact the aforesaid question whether the petitioners were agriculturist or not are required to be considered in appropriate proceedings initiated by the appropriate authority and even the petitioners are ready and willing face the proceedings after initiation of the proceedings by the appropriate authority under the provisions of the Act. However, it is submitted that for the alleged breach of Sections 2(6) and 63 of the Bombay Tenancy Act both the authorities were not justified in cancelling the mutation entry.