JAYANTIBHAI BHALABHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this appeal, the appellants have challenged the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, Dated : 26.04.2011, rendered in Special Civil Application No. 16456 of 2010, whereby, the petition filed by the appellants came to be dismissed.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to the filing of the present appeal reads as under;

(3.) ONE Mangaji Dhamaji was declared a permanent tenant of the land situated at Vlg. : Makarba, Tal. : City, Dist. : Ahmedabad, bearing Survey No. 451/2, ad -measuring about acres 3 35 gunthas by the Mamlatdar and ALT, City, vide order dated 22.05.1963, subject to the restrictions of Section 43 of the Tenancy Act. Said Mangaji expired in the year 1972, leaving behind his son Bapuji Mangaji. In the year 1993, Bapuji S/o. Mangaji challenged the order dated 22.05.1963 by filing Tenancy Revision No.44 of 1993, which came to be allowed by the Collector on 27.07.1993 and the restrictions in respect of the aforesaid land under Section 43 of the Tenancy Act came to be removed. Pursuant to the aforesaid order, an entry also came to be made in the Revenue Records vide Entry No. 7400 on 02.09.1993. The present petitioners purchased the aforesaid land in the year 1993, relying on the order passed by the collector of removing restriction from the said land. However, in the year 2006, the petitioners came to know that the State had preferred Revision against the order of the Collector, Dated : 27.07.1993, without joining them as a party. The petitioners, therefore, preferred an application for impleading them as party in the Review filed by the State, which came to be allowed and they were permitted to be joined as the party -respondents. The Revision filed by the State came to be allowed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (for short, The Tribunal )on 25.07.2007. However, while doing so the Tribunal directed the Collector to consider the case of the appellants for regularization of their transaction on payment of suitable amount of premium, which was to be determined by him within three months from the date of the order. The appellants, then, approached the Collector after completing the necessary formalities, i.e. filling up of form etc. However, the Collector did not comply with the order of the Tribunal. The appellants, hence, made oral requests as well as made several representations before the Collector, but, same were of no avail. Hence, the appellants preferred SCA No. 13042 of 2010 before this Court. Pursuant to the order issued by this Court in the said petition, the Collector determined the premium for Agricultural Use of the aforesaid land, prevailing as on 17.10.1993. Hence, the appellants preferred the captioned petition, which came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge vide impugned judgment and order. Hence, the present appeal.