GOVINDBHAI MAHIPATBHAI DESAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short facts of the case are that on 19.5.1956 the order was passed by the authority for grant of the land to Mahipat Manilal Desai whose heirs are the petitioners herein, on payment of the occupation price of the land bearing Survey No.479 and No.966/2 as old tenure. As per the petitioners, the occupation price was paid after the order dated 19.5.1956. However, as per the order communicated by the Collector dated 10.1.1958, if any of the Inamdars did not deposit the amount of occupation price on or before 30th April, 1956, all lands were to vest with the State Government and, therefore, accordingly as occupation price qua the land in question was not paid, vide Entry No.3858 dated 19.9.1958, the land was recorded as vested to the State Government together with the other lands. On 15.8.1988, the petitioners herein preferred appeal being Appeal No.50/1988 before the Dy. Collector against the Entry No.3859 for treating the land as land vested to the Government. The said appeal came to be dismissed by the Dy. Collector as per the order dated 25.11.1988. The petitioners preferred further revision before the Collector being No.2/1989, which came to be dismissed on 2.4.1990. The matter was further carried before the State Government in revisional jurisdiction being No.37/1990 and the said revision of the petitioners came to be dismissed on 31.1.1991. In all the proceedings through out, it appears that the matters were concluded against the petitioners, not only on the ground of limitation, but also on the ground that as occupation price was not paid before 30th April, 1956, the land vested to the Government and the entry was rightly effected.

(2.) It appears that after the dismissal of the revision by the State Government, the petitioners made representation to the State Government to grant the lands in question and by vide Yadi dated 8.6.1992, the Government decided to grant the land to the petitioners, excluding the land over which the Government quarters were constructed. It deserves to be recorded that after the land in question vested to the Government, the same were reserved for Government quarters, the possession of the same was also handed over to the authority and thereafter the Government as per order dated 8.6.1992 had taken decision to grant the land in question to the petitioners as old tenure, excluding the land over which the Government quarters were in existence. Based on the said Yadi dated 8.6.1992, the State Government communicated to the District Collector vide letter dated 15.7.1992 for taking action in the matter of allotment of the land, excluding the land in which the Government quarters were already constructed. As per the petitioners, since the Collector did not take any action for allotment of the land in spite of the direction given by the Government, Special Civil Application No.385 of 1993 and other was preferred by the petitioners for implementation of the Government order dated 8.6.1992. However, it appears that by the subsequent order dated 13.3.1993, the State Government itself revoked the earlier order dated 8.6.1992 and, therefore, the said petitions were disposed of as having become infructuous. At that stage also the petitioners did not make any grievance against revocation of the earlier order dated 8.6.1992 passed by the State Government.

(3.) It appears that thereafter the petitioners further continued to pursue the matter at the level of the State Government for grant of the land and vide communication dated 23.7.1997 read with the correction order dated 5.8.1997, it was decided once again by the State Government to allot the land to the petitioners. Pending the aforesaid, the petitioner had also preferred Civil Suit No.184 of 1993 for allotment of the land, but as the State Government once again decided to allot the land as per the order dated 23.7.1997 read with the order dated 5.8.1997, the petitioner withdrew the said Civil Suit, which was pending before the Civil Court. It appears that on 17.2.1998 the petition was preferred by one Gauriben Dungarbhai Waghela, in her capacity as the President of the Viramgam Municipality and Jagdishbhai Makarbhai Dalvadi, in his capacity as Vice-President of the Municipality as public spirited litigants, being Special Civil Application No.6539 of 1997 in this Court, for challenging the legality and validity of the action of the Government to allot the land in question to the petitioner. In the said petition, which was treated as Public Interest Limitation (hereinafter referred to as "PIL"for short), the Division Bench of this Court on 17.2.1998 passed the following order: