DHRUVKUMAR GIRISHCHANDRA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY an order dated 18th January, 2013, notice for final disposal had been issued in this matter and accordingly, the matter has come up before this court for final hearing.

(2.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following substantive reliefs:-

(3.) IT appears that being aggrieved by the order dated 27th April, 1998 passed by the Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant Surat, on 4th June, 1999, the State of Gujarat went in revision before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal by way of Revision Application No.TEN.BS.42/1999 after a delay of one year and two months. It appears the before the Tribunal Dhanuben submitted a pursis and declared her intention to convert the land into non agriculture so as to put an end to the controversy. By an order dated 27 th December, 2006, the Tribunal dismissed the said revision application with a direction that as undertaken by the purchaser-Dhanuben Keshavbhai, the State Government shall be at liberty to levy premium for the change of purpose from agricultural use to non-agricultural use as per the rules-guidelines prevailing at the time when such N.A. use would be sought by her. Thereafter, on 2 nd/18th May, 2007, Dhanuben Patel made an application to the Collector, Surat seeking non agricultural use permission in respect of the subject land. It appears that some correspondence was entered into between the Government authorities as to whether the order passed by the Tribunal was required to be challenged before this court. On 14 th August, 2007 the Deputy Secretary, Legal Department wrote to the Government Pleader to file a writ petition against the order of the Tribunal. In the meantime, the petitioner purchased the subject land by a registered sale deed from Dhanuben Patel. The petitioner was ready and willing to pay the premium for conversion from non-agricultural to agricultural as per the undertaking given by Dhanuben and therefore made several requests to comply with the order of the Tribunal, however, to no avail.