VASUDEV SAKARBHAI MODI Vs. SPECIAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPARTMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these petitions have been filed by one Vasudev Sakarabhai Modi against the same respondents challenging the order dated 31 (Annexure A to the petition) of the City Deputy Collector Ahmedabad Order dated 31-1-1977 (Annexure B) of the District Collector Ahmedabad and order dated 12-12-1977 (Annexure C) of the Special Secretary. Revenue Department Ahmedabad passed separately in each case. Since the questions involved in both these petitions being identical they are being disposed of by this common judgment.

(2.) The petitioner is the occupant of City Survey Nos. 295 501 496 498 1500 and 1591 situated in Wadaj Ward of Ahmedabad City. The petitioner was given show cause notice dated 28-5-1976 so far as Special Civil Application No. 1288 of 1978 is concerned and show-cause notice dated 27-11-1975 so far as Special Civil Application No. 1289 of 1978 is concerned by the authority for the use of Survey No. 591 and Survey Nos. 495 501 496 498 and 500 respectively by constructing Kutcha hutments without permission. It is alleged that by using the said survey numbers for non-agricultural purpose. the petitioner has contravened the provisions of sec. 66 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code 1879 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) and rule 100 of the Bombay Land Revenue Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The petitioner in reply to the said show-cause notices stated that he has not committed any contravention and that the said hutments of the lands in question were constructed by the trespassers against who he has taken action and there were litigations amongst the co-owners and in consequence of the said litigations earlier Receiver was appointed and thereafter Court Commissioner was appointed. The petitioner has. therefore denied his liability for any contraven tion or penalty.

(3.) Both the cases were heard by the City Deputy Collector Ahmedabad. who has reproduced the contentions of the petitioner and observed that litigations amongst the brothers appointment of Receiver by the High Court and thereafter appointment of Commissioner by the City Civil Court and the ignorance of the petitioner as to who had constructed these hutments cannot be considered to be the legitimate grounds. The petitioners no objection if the said hutments are removed was also not considered to be a good ground. The City Deputy Collector relied upon the ground that the petitioner had not obtained No Objection Certificate from the Municipal Corporation of the City of Ahmedabad and no permission could be granted in absence of such certificate. He therefore straightway passed an order under sec. 66 of the Code read with rule 100 of the Rules and ordered (by Annexure A dated 31-7-1976) to recover from the petitioner for the years 1971-72 to 1975-76 by way of fine 40 times the amount at the rate of 12 paise per sq. metre for each year plus Rs. 36.50 paise as surcharge for 1 821 sq. mts. and local cess tax etc.