(1.) Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Siraj Gori waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 2. An important question of law has been raised in this petition to the effect that whether while fixing the amount of premium under section 43 of The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act,1948 for conversion of new and restricted tenure land into an old tenure land, an opportunity of being heard ought to be provided to the applicant or not " Section 43(1) of The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act,1948 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act,1948), reads as under :-
(2.) This petition has been preferred against the order dated 18th November,2005 passed by the Collector, Kutch (Annexure "D" to the memo of the petition), whereby the petitioner has been ordered to deposit Rs. 23,16,456/- for allowing the land bearing Survey no. 910/22 of village Varsamedi, Taluka Anjar for conversion into old tenure land.
(3.) Learned advocate Shri A.J.Patel, for the petitioner, mainly submitted that the impugned order dated 18th November,2005 passed by the Collector, Kutch, is violative of principles of natural justice. The amount of premium directed to be paid under section 43 of The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The impugned order is not a speaking order at all. What is running in the mind of Collector,Kutch is not capable of being read by the petitioner. The figures have come in the mind of the Collector, Kutch from heaven or sky. There ought to be some basis and ought to be some calculation for arriving at a prices referred to in the impugned order, whereby the petitioner is directed to make payment of 80% of Rs.28,95,570/- i.e. Rs.23,16,456/- arbitrarily. This figure has been fixed without any basis and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Arbitrariness and equality are sworn enemies of each other. Where arbitrariness is present, equality is absent and, hence, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside.