MAHENDRA BHANRAJ MANCHHANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Mr.Prakash Jani, learned Government Pleader with Ms.Nisha M.Thakore, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for the respondents. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and with the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, the petition is being heard and finally decided.

(2.) The petitioners, 62 in number, have preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to issue an appropriate Writ, order or direction, to quash and set aside order dated 30.10.2010, passed by the Deputy Secretary, Revenue Department, and the consequential order dated 28.12.2010, passed by the District Collector, Ahmedabad, and to direct the respondent-authorities to allot plots admeasuring 25 square metres each to the petitioners, as per Section 23 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 ("the Act" for short).

(3.) The case appears to have a chequered history, therefore, it would be appropriate to notice a few relevant facts. The petitioners belong to weaker section of the society and would answer to the description of "urban poor". Being in dire need of residential houses, and in view of the prevailing policy of the State Government formulated as per the provisions of Section 23 of the Act, the petitioners applied to the Competent Authority for allotment of plots as per the Scheme of the Act, on different dates. Lands bearing Survey Nos.154-A and 154-B of Naroda area admeasuring 2040.62 square metres, were declared surplus and the State Government took possession of the same. Small plots, admeasuring 25 square metres, were demarcated and a decision was taken by the State Government to allot plots to the urban poor. It is the case of the petitioners that at the relevant point of time, the petitioners had deposited an amount of Rs.250/- towards occupancy price, pursuant to which they were allotted plots of land, by order dated 25.10.1993. Paper possession of the said plots was handed over to them, though actual physical possession was not given. As possession had not been handed over to the petitioners and others, a petition, being Special Civil Application No.452 of 2001 was preferred by "Jay Shree Mahabali Mitra Mandal Trust", in a representative capacity. During the pendency of the said petition, Special Civil Applications Nos.8670/2001 and 5963/2002 were preferred by the original owner of the land, challenging the proceedings under the Act, whereby the land allotted to the petitioners was declared as "excess". The petition filed by the Trust was heard along with the two petitions filed by the original land owner and, vide common judgment dated 29.03.2007, Special Civil Application No.8670 of 2001 was allowed whereas Special Civil Application No.5963 of 2002 was dismissed. It was declared that the order dated 25.10.1993, allotting the land in favour of the petitioners would not continue in operation insofar as the land bearing Survey No.154-A and 154-B of village Naroda is concerned. However, the State Government was directed to allot other land to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible and practicable, sympathetically, and in accordance with law. This order has been accepted by the State Government, as stated in communication dated 04.08.2008, annexed at running page-46 to the petition. As no allotment of land came to be made, the petitioners made several representations to the respondent-authorities. Ultimately, another petition, being Special Civil Application No.1938 of 2008 came to be filed, that was disposed of by order dated 04.08.2008, directing the Competent Authority to examine all aspects of the matter and after granting personal hearing, if desired by the petitioners, to submit his Report to the Government as expeditiously as possible and preferably within twelve weeks from the date of receipt of representation made to him. Further, the State Government was directed to take the final decision preferably within four months thereafter, and the entire exercise was directed to be completed within nine months from the date of passing of the order. The order dated 04.08.2008 has not been challenged in any Court of law. As no order was passed by the Competent Authority even after completion of nine months, as directed by this Court, the Trust filed a Contempt Petition, being Miscellaneous Civil Application No.3332 of 2009. In the said proceedings, Mr.A.Bhattacharya, I.A.S., Commissioner of Land Reforms and Ex-officio Principal Secretary, Revenue Department, filed an affidavit on 20.03.2010, stating that the directions given by this Court in order dated 04.08.2008 would be complied with within a period of fifteen days from the date of filing of the affidavit. It was further stated that a final decision has been taken by the State Government at the highest level on 24.02.2010, for allotting plots of land admeasuring 25 square metres each, as per policy laid down in Government Resolution dated 30.05.1987. The Court was assured that necessary consequential formalities for the above-said purpose would be completed as expeditiously as possible, but not later than four months. In view of the said affidavit, the Contempt Petition was not pressed by the applicants and was ultimately disposed of by order dated 23.03.2010. Thereafter, it appears that vide communication dated 22.03.2010, the State Government had directed the Collector to send a Report. On 28.06.2010, the Collector sent the Report to the State Government, on the basis of verification carried out by the Mamlatdar, City. On 30.10.2010, the Deputy Secretary, Revenue Department, issued an order rejecting the cases of 146 persons (including the petitioners), for allotment of plots under the Scheme of the Government, based upon the opinion of the Collector. This is one of the orders impugned in the petition. On the basis of this order, the Collector passed a consequential order dated 28.12.2010, holding that 146 persons, including the petitioners, cannot be allotted plots of land as they are not found to be eligible. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioners have approached this Court by filing the present petitions.