DISTRICT COLLECTOR KUTCH Vs. SITABEN POONAMCHAND ACHARYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This intra Court appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent is directed against the judgment and order dtd. 26/7/2019 delivered in Special Civil Application No.18102 of 2016 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the learned Single Judge held that the order passed by the Collector in Appeal/Jaman/108(6) Case No.82 of 2016 is bad in law and hence, quashed and set aside the order.

(2.) Facts are briefly stated as, the original petitioners have purchased land bearing survey No.323/2 situated at village Mithirohar, Tal: Gandhidham, Dist: Kachchh on 12/7/2004 from one Vasantkumar Karsandas Bhanushali, by way of registered sale deed. The registered sale deed has been given effect by the revenue department by mutating entry No.2940 in favour of the original petitioners on 21/10/2004. After a span of three years, the Secretary and Commissioner (Land Development), Revenue Department, Gandhinagar addressed a letter dtd. 3/4/2012 to the Collector, Kachchh stating that the original petitioners and their family members are not agriculturists. The documents, which are produced for claiming to be agriculturist are fabricated and hence, there is breach of Sec. 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (in short "the Tenancy Act").

(3.) Since the action of the Collector has taken after a period of 10 years, the original petitioners approached the learned Single Judge by way of filing captioned Special Civil Application seeking relief to quash and set aside the order dtd. 19/8/2016 passed by the respondent No.1 - Collector in Appeal/Jaman/108(6)/Case No.82 of 2016 and permanently restrain the respondent No.2- Mamlatdar from taking any action in furtherance of the impugned order of respondent no.1 and not to disturb mutation entry No.2940, 5393 and 5557.