MOHAMMED HANIF MAHMAD HUSSEIN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Kanara, waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent No.1 - State. The respondent Nos.3 and 4 have refused to accept the notice issued by this Court.

(2.) At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Darshan Dave, appearing for the learned advocate Ms.Krushita D. Dave, for the petitioners has submitted that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Dharmendra Pramukhbhai Patel Vs. Collector, Ahmedabad, [AIR 2020 CC 1449]. It is further submitted that it is well settled proposition of law that wherein no limitation is provided in the statue, the powers has to be exercised within a reasonable period and in the present case, the power has been exercised after a period of 43 years for the mutation entries, which have been mutated in the year 1975. Thus, it is submitted that the impugned orders may be set aside.

(3.) Per contra, learned AGP has submitted that the orders are appropriately passed and the same may not be interfered with since the entries were mutated against the provisions of law.