ALPESH CHIMANLAL PATEL Vs. SPECIAL SECRETARY - APPEALS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the petitions involving similar issues on facts and law, were decided by the respondent No.1 by passing similar orders on 03.05.2013. Hence, both petitions were heard together and are being decided by this common judgement.

(2.) By way of present petitions, the petitioners have sought to challenge the orders dated 3.5.2013 passed by the respondent No.1 Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department (hereinafter referred to as "SSRD") in Revision Application No.MVV/HKP/AMD/30/2009 and No.MVV/HKP/AMD/31/2009 filed under Rule 108(6A) of the Bombay Land Revenue Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the said Rules") against the orders dated 21.2.2009 passed by the respondent Collector in Review Case No.3/2008 and No.6/2008.

(3.) As per the case of the petitioners of Special Civil Application No. 11348 of 2013, the land bearing Survey No.145 admeasuring 2 Hectares 63 Acres 5 Sq. mtrs., of Village Chandkheda, Taluka Daskroi, District Ahmedabad was shown as the Chakariyapasa. On coming into force of Vatan Abolition Act, 1956, the said land was declared as Khalsa land vide the order dated 5.6.1956 passed by the Collector. According to the petitioners, the said land was thereafter allotted on permanent basis as new tenure land to one Shri Dahyabhai Desai, Smt. Gajraben, W/o Babuji Vaghaji, Shri Jivabhai Jorabhai, Shri Dudhaji Nagarji, Shri Ramabhai Punjabhai, and Shri Laxman Anuji, subject to the conditions mentioned therein, by Talati-cum-Mantri, Chandkheda vide the order dated 28.6.1971 (Annexure-A). The revenue entry came to be posted in that regard. The said land was allotted, subject to payment of Rs.1,000/- per acre by way of occupancy price as stated in the said order. It appears that the said order being not in consonance with the prevalent policy of the Government, the Collector in exercise of his suo motu powers under Section 211 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") had issued the notice calling upon the said allottees to show cause as to why the said order of the Prant Officer should not be set aside, he having no authority to allot and he having recovered the occupancy price at the rate of Rs.1,000/- per acre only, instead of recovering 2½ times the market price of the land. The District Collector thereafter set aside the said order passed by the Prant Officer and remanded the case to him for deciding afresh the amount of occupancy price as per the policy of the Government, vide the order dated 2.5.1973 (Annexure-B). As per the further case of the petitioners, the Village Chandkheda was part of Taluka Daskroi at the relevant time and subsequently came to be included in Taluka Gandhinagar. Hence, no steps were taken pursuant to the said order passed by the District Collector since 1973 till 2003.