(1.) The petitioners have assailed the order dtd. 7/3/2005 passed by the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department (SSRD) allowing the revision application filed by the private respondent(s).
(2.) At the outset, learned advocate Mr.Satta has submitted that the impugned order has been passed ex-parte without giving opportunity to the petitioners since no intimation was granted about the matter being kept on the said day. Moreover, it is submitted that the private respondents have assailed the order dtd. 20/2/1971 passed by the Deputy Collector, after a period of almost 28 years, by filing revision application in the year 1999, which was also rejected by the Collector, Patan. It is submitted that thereafter, the private respondents filed revision application before the SSRD, which has been allowed by the impugned order. Thus, he has submitted that the impugned order is required to be quashed and set aside.
(3.) Learned AGP Mr.Parikh is unable to dispute the fact that the private respondents had assailed the order dtd. 20/2/1971 passed by the Deputy Collector by filing the revision application in the year 1999 and the Collector, by the order dtd. 5/5/1999, has rejected such application on the ground of delay. It is thus, submitted that the impugned order may not be interfered with at this stage.