VISHNUBHAI PARSHOTTAMBHAI PATEL Vs. SOMABHAI HARMANBHAI PATEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard, Mr. V. C. Desai, learned advocate for the petitioners, Mr. Rajesh B. Soni, learned advocate for the respondent No. 2 and Mr. Rahul Dave, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No. 9. Rule served to respondent Nos. 1 and 3 to 8.

(2.) Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 09/01/2012, passed in RTS No. 23 of 2003 by the Additional Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, Ahmedabad the respondent No. 9 herein, by which the judgment and order, passed by the Collector, Kheda, dated 29/01/2003 in RTS Revision No. 22 of 2002, cancelling the mutation entry No. 341 has been confirmed, the petitioners have preferred the present petition.

(3.) The uncontroversial facts of the case on hand are that the agricultural land bearing Block No. 69, admeasuring Hector 2, Acre 40 sq. Mt. 79 situated at Village Hajatia, Taluka: Mahudha, District: Kheda, originally owned by Harmanbhai Becharbhai and Babarbhai Becharbhai. In respect of said Block No. 69, land admeasuring Hector 1 Acre, 45 Sq. Mts. 68, was sold to the petitioners for Rs.48,000/by a Registered Sale Deed dated 26/05/1987 and possession of the said land was also handed over to the said purchasers and since then, the petitioners are in possession of the said land and cultivating the same. On the basis of said Registered Sale Deed, mutation entry No. 341 was posted on 07/06/1988 in the revenue record i.e. Village Form No. 6. Thereafter, another entry No. 398 was also posted on 04/11/1991. In view of the objections raised and RTS Appeal No. 70 of 1992 filed by the sellers before the Deputy Collector, Kheda, said appeal was heard and by the judgment dated 31/05/1993, the said appeal was dismissed. Against the said judgment, sellers filed RTS Revision No. 75 of 1993 before the Collector, Kheda. By a judgment dated 23/06/1997, Collector, Kheda allowed the said appeal and remanded the matter to the Deputy Collector. After the order of remand, said appeal was renumbered as RTS Appeal No. 92 of 1998 and by a judgment dated 22/07/1999, remanded the case to the Mamlatdar with a direction to ascertain as to whether sale transaction had been entered into after obtaining permission of division of Block No. 69. After the said order of remand case was numbered as Takrari Remand Case No. 13 of 1999 and by an order dated 15/04/2000, the Mamlatdar, Mahudha held that the said entry No. 341 was in contravention of the provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 (for short 'the Fragmentation Act'). Hence, the said mutation entry No. 341 was not certified and Mamlatdar ordered to cancel the said entry. Against the said order of Mamlatdar, the purchasers petitioners filed RTS Appeal No. 97 of 2000 (New No. 38 of 2000) before the Deputy Collector, Kheda, which came to be dismissed by judgment dated 29/06/2002. Against the said judgment, the purchasers petitioners filed RTS Revision No. 22 of 2002 before the Collector, Kheda, which came to be dismissed by judgment dated 29/01/2003, against which, the petitioners filed RTS Revision No. 23 of 2003 before the respondent No. 9 herein Additional Secretary (Appeal), Revenue Department. The petitioners filed the written arguments together with the copies of the judgments relied by them, one which was the judgment reported in 2005 (2) GCD 1277. It is the case of the petitioners that, without considering the legal points raised in the said written arguments so also, the judgments relied upon, by judgment dated 09/01/2002, the respondent No. 9 was pleased to dismiss the said Revision.