PESTANJI JAMSHEDJI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Miscellaneous Civil Application for restoration of Special Civil Application is granted and disposed of and the Special Civil Application is finally heard. The learned Counsel for the petitioner challenges the order of the Competent Authority and the Appellate Authority declaring excess surplus land of the petitioner from his holding of land.

(2.) The orders are challenged on two grounds : (1) That the land of survey No. 124 admeasuring about 9,915 sq. mts. is agricultural land and mainly used for agriculture on the date of commencement of the Act and, therefore, it is not vacant land and, therefore, it could not have been included in the petitioner's holding of vacant land and could not have been declared surplus. (2) The petitioner's application for exemption of this land made on 7-8-1976 was pending and not decided when the Competent Authority and the Appellate Authority decided to include this land in the holding of the petitioner and declared the excess land.

(3.) The first contention is based on the definition of 'vacant land' in Sec. 10(2) which provides that 'vacant land' means land, not being land mainly used for the purpose of agriculture, in an urban agglomeration. The definition or 'urban land' in Sec. 2(o) is in the same language that 'urban land' means any land situated within the limits of an urban agglomeration, but does not include any such land which is mainly used for the purpose of agriculture.