DANJIBHAI P PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four writ petitions involving common questions of (1) exercise of suo motu powers of review beyond reasonable time under Rule 108 (6) of the Bombay Land Revenue Rules, 1972, and (2) the effect of the amendment in Section 2 (6) of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Land Act, and cancellation of mutation entry recorded in favour of the petitioners; on the ground that each of the petitioners has been residing beyond 8 K.ms. from the land in question, are disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) All the petitioners who are residents of Himatnagar, district Sabarkantha, purchased different parcel of lands in village Motipura, taluka Himatnagar, district Sabarkantha from the respective owner of the agricultural land concerned. All the petitioners are said to have purchased agricultural land in year 1982. The mutation entry in respect of agricultural land purchased by them respectively came to be posted/ certified in their favour in the year 1982 itself. The Deputy Collector, Himatnagar, district Sabarkantha exercised suo motu powers under Rule 108 (6) of the Land Revenue Rules, 1972 and vide his order dated 26-12-1988 reviewed the entry mutated in favour of the petitioners and cancelled the same on the ground that, each of the petitioners was residing beyond a distance of 8 K.ms from the agricultural land which they have purchased in year 1982 and for which mutation entry which had come to be passed and certified later on in favour of the petitioners. Against the order passed in RTS Cases by Dy. Collector, Himatnagar, each of the petitioners preferred appeal as under:-

(3.) The petitioners have challenged the order whereby mutation in their favour has been cancelled by the authority concerned (Dy. Collector/ Mamlatdar) in respect of agricultural land which they have purchased in year 1982.