MUSAMIYA IMAM HAIDER BUX RRAZVI Vs. VADILALMULJIBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS all the appeals arise from the common judgement and order passed by the learned Single Judge, they are being considered simultaneously.

(2.) ALL the appeals are directed against the judgement and order passed by the learned Single Judge in the respective Special Civil Applications, whereby all the petitions have been dismissed.

(3.) IT appears that thereafter the learned Single Judge formulated the points at paragraph 13 (1), (2), and (3) and thereafter decided that since the respondent No.1 was declared as inferior holder under Gujarat Devasthan Inams Abolition Act, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Inams Abolition Act' for the sake of convenience), it was not required for the Mamlatdar and ALT to decide the question under Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Tenancy Act" for the sake of convenience) as to whether Bai Mariam, whose interest has been purchased by respondent no.1 was tenant of the original petitioner ­ appellant herein i.e. Musamiya. The learned Single Judge found that even if the question of inferior holder was to be decided, the same has been rightly decided by the Deputy Collector, the First Authority under Inams Abolition Act and consequently rightly confirmed by the appellate and revisional authorities. The learned Single Judge also found that as the question was not required to be decided by Mamlatdar and ALT and its further confirmation thereof in appeal and in revision before the lower authority did not call for any interference. Ultimately, for the reasons recorded in the impugned judgement, the learned Single Judge dismissed all the petitions. Under these circumstances, the present appeals before the Division Bench of this Court.