SIMANDHAR SWAMI ARADHNA TRUST Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition filed by the petitioner Trust under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 12.11.2010 passed by the respondent No.2 Collector as also against the communications dated 6.7.2010 and 20.10.2010 made by the respondent No.1. The petitioner has also challenged the corrigendum dated 11.5.2011 issued by the Revenue Department and also the intimation dated 3.8.2011 issued by the Collector, as also the order dated 28.3.2011 passed by the Collector pending the petition.

(2.) The chequered history of the case in nut-shell is that the petitioner, which is a religious charitable Trust was desirous of purchasing the lands bearing Survey No.295/2 (Block No.409/1) and Survey No.295/1 and 295/3 (Block No.409/2), for carrying on its charitable activities. The petitioner Trust had applied for necessary permission under Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Tenancy Act"), which was granted by the Collector, Gandhinagar vide the order dated 17.11.1999, subject to the conditions mentioned therein. The petitioner, therefore, purchased the said lands through the registered Sale Deed on 27.11.1999. Out of the said two lands, the land bearing Survey No.295/2 (Block No.409/1) was an old tenure land, however, the other land bearing Survey No.295/1-3 (Block No.409/2) being new tenure land, the petitioner had applied for the permission under Section 43 of the Tenancy Act on 11.2.2000 for converting the said land from new tenure to old tenure. The respondent No.2 Collector allowed the said application for conversion of the land from new tenure to old tenure, subject to the payment of premium of Rs.18,86,962/- as per the order dated 5.10.2000. The petitioner Trust had applied for the exemption from making payment of premium on the ground that the said lands were to be used for charitable purposes, however, the said application having been rejected, the petitioner Trust deposited the said amount with the respondent No.2 on 31.12.2002. Since the said amount of premium was not paid within stipulated time, the State Government directed the Collector vide the communication dated 25.8.2003 to recover the amount of interest at the rate of 9% per annum for the delayed payment. The Collector thereafter extended the time to deposit the said amount, and the petitioner paid the interest amount to the tune of Rs.4,07,584/- on 13.1.2004. In the meantime, the petitioner Trust had applied for the development permission on 16.8.2001. However, the same was not granted by the Gandhinagar Urban Development Authority vide communication dated 30.12.2005, as the land was included in the agricultural zone in the Development Plan. It appears that thereafter on the representation having been made by the petitioner, the lands in question were put under the residential zone by the Government vide the Notification dated 7.7.2008. The petitioner therefore, again applied to the Collector for the extension of time qua the permissions granted under Section 63 of the Tenancy Act.

(3.) The respondent Collector thereafter vide the letter dated 22.12.2009 had called upon the petitioner to clarify as to whether the petitioner was ready and willing to pay the premium which would be calculated as per the Circular dated 4.7.2008. The petitioner was required to give consent in that regard to the Mamlatdar, Gandhinagar and, therefore, the petitioner vide the letter dated 31.12.2009 submitted the reply to the effect that the petitioner having already paid the premium with interest, the question of paying the premium again did not arise. It appears that thereafter the State Government in Revenue Department vide the Memorandum dated 6.7.2010 extended the time limit of the order granting permission under Section 63 of the Tenancy Act, for the period of one year, subject to the payment of premium and other conditions as mentioned in the said order. The Collector, therefore, called upon the petitioner vide the letter dated 31.7.2010 to pay the premium amount of Rs.1,88,13,038/- accordingly. The said order was corrected by the Collector vide the letter dated 12.11.2010 by stating, inter alia, that the petitioner having deposited the premium amount earlier, the petitioner would be required to deposit Rs.75,07,854/- only before the Talati-cum-Mantri, Adalaj. Being aggrieved by the said order dated 12.11.2010 the petitioner had filed the present petition on 17.1.2011.