NARAYANBHAI PURSHOTTAMBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) xxx xxx xxx

(2.) The petitioner possessed several parcels of land in village Maneja. Jambuva and Mujar Gamdi within the urban agglomeration of Vadodara. He applied for exemption under Section 20(1) of the Act with respect to all his lands including the disputed lands. The ground given claiming exemption was that the lands in question including the disputed lands were used for agricultural purposes. After giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by the order passed by and on behalf of the respondent on 14th June 1993, the petitioner's application came to be rejected qua the disputeed lands.

(3.) The application for exemption has been rejected mainly on the grounds that grass was grown on the disputed lands during agricultural years, 1982-1983 to 1984-1985 and that the lands were not situated in the agricultural zone. The second ground cannot be sustained in law for the simple reason that, if the lands were situated in the agricultural zone and agricultural operations were carried on therein at the time of coming into force of the Act, they would be excluded from the applicability of the Act in view of the binding ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Smt. Atia Mohammadi Begum v. State of U. P. and Others reported in AIR 1993 SC 2465.