KUMARSINH VESHALJI PADHIYAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Ms .Asmita Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for respondents Nos.1 and 2. Mr.Kirit R.Patel, learned advocate for Mr.H.S.Munshaw, learned advocate, waives service of notice of Rule for respondent No.3. 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, today.

(2.) The brief facts of the case relevant for the decision of the petition are that the petitioner purchased land admeasuring 7 Acres from one Harijan Dhanji Khiyasi. The land had already been converted to old tenure after payment of premium by the predecessor-in-title of the petitioner. Out of this land, the petitioner sold 1 Acre and 36 Gunthas to Mr.Sardarsinh Kanubha Jadeja and Mr.Abdul Amad Bakali by way of a registered Sale Deed, on 05.09.2011. The remaining land admeasuring 5 Acres and 04 Gunthas remained with the petitioner. Vide application dated 18.07.2008, the petitioner requested the Collector, Kutchh at Bhuj, to convert his land into non-agricultural land. The petitioner also paid necessary fees of Rs.5,400/- for measurement/ survey of the land. On persistent inquiry, the petitioner was told that the application is not processed. Mr.Sardarsinh Kanubha Jadeja and Mr.Abdul Amad Bakali, who had purchased part of the land of Survey No.853 Paiki from the petitioner, made an application for grant of conversion of the land for non-agricultural use on 21.11.2009, which was allowed by the Collector vide order dated 01.10.2010, with the direction to deposit an amount of Rs.4,61,280/- for conversion purposes. Accordingly, Mr.Sardarsinh Kanubha Jadeja and Mr.Abdul Amad Bakali deposited an amount of premium and permission for conversion of the land for non-agricultural use under Section 65 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879, has already been granted to them; whereas permission has not been granted to the petitioner, even though his application is prior in point of time to that of Mr.Sardarsinh Kanubha Jadeja and Mr.Abdul Amad Bakali. The petitioner was informed vide the impugned communication dated 16.08.2011, that his application cannot be considered, as the measurement of the land in question has not taken place and the measurement-sheet has not been produced. Aggrieved by the above communication, the petitioner has approached this Court by making the prayers reproduced hereinabove. It emerges from the order dated 30.10.2012, of this Court that as per the oral direction issued by the Court, the authorities have remeasured the land in question and the measurement-sheet has been prepared.

(3.) Mr. Kirit R.Patel, learned advocate for Mr.H.S.Munshaw, learned advocate for respondent No.3, submits that respondent No.3 has no role to play as it is the Collector who has to consider and decide the application. Having heard learned counsel for the respective parties and in view of the fact that now the DILR has measured the land and the measurement-sheet has been placed on record by respondent No.2, vide the affidavit dated 27.12.2012, there does not appear to be any other impediment in the way of respondent No.2 in considering the application made by the petitioner for grant of non-agricultural use permission, in accordance with law.