RAMANBHAI DIVABHAI MALI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed under section 20 of the Urban Land 'Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976 refusing exemption. This order was passed on December 21, 1985 on the petitioner's application dated July 18,1984. The application came to be. rejected on the ground that the notifications under section 10(1) and 10(3) of the Act had already been published in the official gazette on November 24, 1983 and February 23,1984 and thus, the land had already vested in the Government and, therefore, there was no question of granting any exemption under section) 20 of the Act. Similar questions have arisen in several other matters and it has been held by different benches of this Court that as the land has vested in the Government by a notification under section 10(3) of the Act, the question of considering the application under section 20 does not arise at all. Such a decision has been rendered in the case of Bharwed Lakhman Vala vs. Secretary, Revenue Department, in Special Civil Application No. 3188 of 1986 decided in September 1991 by the Division Bench comprising of G.T. Nanavati & S.D. Shah, JJ. In Special Civil Application No. 3203 of 1989, the learned single Judge (Coram : S.D. Shah, J.) vide his judgment dated July 1,1991, has also taken the same view. So also, by another judgment dated August 26,1991 in Special Civil Application No. 3323 of 1991, the same view is taken. In the case of Parmanand R. Gohil vs. Deputy Collector and Competent Authority,., Mr. Justice N.H. Bhatt has also taken the same view.

(2.) The learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, tried to rely on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Srilata Gopal vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1990 SC 294. It is a case under Andhra Pradesh Ceiling & Agricultural Holdings Act wherein the Supreme Court held that the land does not vest in the State till it is taken over by the State under section 8 of Andhra Pradesh Act by paying Compensation. The language of section 8 of Andhra Pradesh Act is materially different from the language of section 10(3) of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act. Section 8 of Andhra Pradesh Act provides that the Reviewing Divisional Officer may by order take over such land on payment of compensation. Where as in the present case, section 10(3) clearly provides that with effect from the date specified in the notification, the land shall be deemed to have been acquired by the State Government and upon the publication of such declaration, such land shall be deemed to have been vested in the State Government free from all encumbrances. Thus, the language of section 10(3) is quite distinct from the language of section 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Act. Section 10(3) is in clear terms making absolute vesting by the publication of notification under section 10(3) of the Act.

(3.) In view of the aforesaid discussion, the authority has rightly rejected the exemption application. Hence, the petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. Interim relief vacated. No costs.