HIRABEN Vs. MAMLATDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with order dtd. 17/4/2017 passed in RTS/Appeal/Case No.92/2016 passed by City Deputy Collector (West), Ahmedabad, the petitioner has preferred this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioners are heirs of Late Somabhai Vastabhai. Late Vastabhai had two sons, viz., Vashrambhai and Somabhai. Late Vastabhai was owner of land bearing Revenue Survey No.604/1 amdeasuring 5666 sq.mtrs. and also of land bearing Revenue Survey No.604/3 admeasuring 5554 sq.mtrs. situated at Village-Sarkhej, District-Ahmedabad. After death of Vastabhai, partition of the aforesaid lands had taken place on the basis of compromise between Vashrambhai and Somabhai. Accordingly, land bearing Revenue Survey No.604/1 came to the share of Somabahi and land of Revenue Survey No.604/3 came to the share of Vashrambhai. Predecessor of the petitioners filed Civil Suit No.218 of 1985 before Civil Judge, Narol, for declaration that plaintiffs be declared as owners and having possession of the land of Revenue Survey No.604/1 and defendant therein may not disturb their possession. The suit was decreed in favour of the plaintiffs vide judgment and decree dtd. 31/3/2008. The same came to be challenged by the defendant by filing Regular Civil Appeal No.16 of 2012, which also came to be dismissed by 10 th Additional District Judge, Ahmedabad at District Court Rural, Mirzapur, Ahmedabad. On the basis of the decree passed by Civil Court, the petitioners approached revenue authority for mutating their names in the revenue records in respect of land bearing Revenue Survey No.604/1. The revenue authority recorded entry no.5234 dtd. 2/4/2009 in Form No.6 on the basis of judgment of the Civil Court, however, it was reflected in secondary rights and not as primary rights and similar entry was being entry No.6419 dtd. 19/12/2015 was mutated, wherein also name of the defendant continued to be shown in primary rights. Against that entry, the petitioner approached respondent no.1 by filing an appeal under Rule 108 (5) of Gujarat State Revenue Rules. The same came to be dismissed by impugned order dtd. 17/4/2017.

(3.) Heard learned Senior Counsel Mr.G.M.Joshi assisted by learned advocate Mr.Asthawadi for the petitioners and learned AGP Mr.Kanara for the respondent-State. Perused the material placed on record.