JESINGBHAI NARSINHBHAI SOLANKI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by way of present petition, seeks to challenge the 11.10.2011 (Annexure 'G'), passed by the respondent No.2 Collector, whereby the application of the petitioner seeking non-agricultural use permission has been rejected on the ground that the land in question being Survey No. 362 paiki 1 admeasuring 1838 sq. mtrs. was declared as an excess vacant land, and the possession thereof has been taken over by the Government on 17.11.1988. The petitioner has also sought declaration to the effect that the subject land in question had not vested in the Government, and further sought direction against the respondent No.2 to grant NA permission to the petitioner in respect of the said land.

(2.) It is case of the petitioner inter alia that the land in question bearing Survey No. 362 paiki (T.P. 23 and Final Plot No. 22) situated at Village Tandalja, District Vadodara belonged to one Dahyabhai Ranchhodbhai and Babarbhai Ranchhodbhai. The said Babarbhai had filled in the form under Section 6 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act'), his holdings including the land in question bearing 362 paiki. The competent authority and Deputy Collector, having processed the said form, had declared the land admeasuring 1838 sq. mtrs. out of the said land as the excess vacant land granting one unit to the said Babarbhai, vide the order dated 18.09.1986 (Annexure 'A'). The son of said Babarbhai i.e. Ramsing Babarbhai having challenged the said order passed by the competent authority, by filing an appeal being No. 52 of 1992 before the Urban Land Tribunal, the said appeal came to be partly allowed, whereby the Tribunal held that the said Ramsingbhai son of Babarbhai was also entitled to one separate unit, and further held that the said Babarbhai held land admeasuring 338 sq. mtrs. only as the excess vacant land and not 1838 sq. mtrs., vide the order dated 30.10.1992 (Annexure 'A- 1'). It appears that the State had challenged the said order passed by the Tribunal by filing Special Civil Application No. 80 of 1996 before this Court. The said petition came to be disposed of by this Court by passing following order on 04.08.1999 : -

(3.) It further appears that thereafter the present petitioner purchased the land admeasuring 1500 sq. mtrs. out of the said survey No. 362 paiki, from the said Ramsingbhai through the registered sale deed on 17.03.2005. On the strength of the said sale deed, the entry being No. 3309 came to be mutated in the revenue record in favour of the petitioner on 28.04.2005, and the said entry was also certified by the competent authority. The petitioner, thereafter, made an application on 16.03.2011 to the Collector seeking permission to use the said land for nonagricultural purpose under Section 65 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Code'). The said application has been rejected by the Collector vide the impugned order dated 11.10.2011 (Annexure 'G'). It further appears that on 19.11.2011, the respondent No.1 wrote a letter directing the respondent No.2 inter alia to put up a notice board over the land in question stating that the land was belonged to the State Government. The petitioner, therefore, had filed a Civil Application being No. 2086 of 2012 in the present petition seeking directions against the concerned respondent to remove the said notice board, which was granted by the Court as per the order dated 27.03.2012, and the said notice board was removed by the respondent. It further appears that thereafter one Civil Application being No. 12948 of 2012 came to be filed by one Mohammed Israrkhan Asgarkhan Pathan for impleading him as party respondent No. 4 in the present petition, which was granted by the Court vide order dated 03.02.2014.