SHANAJI TAKHUJI Vs. DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND REVENUE)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this Writ Application the petitioners seek to challenge Order dated 28th October, 1991 passed by the Deputy Collector, Gandhinagar in Case No.Tenancy/Section - 65/S.R.37/86, directing resumption of the land under Section 65 for a period of ten years as the land was lying fellow and uncultivated for a period of two years. It is necessary to note that the said order was challenged by the petitioners before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.B.A.141/93 and the Tribunal was pleased to return the Revision Memo along with its annexures on 25th November, 1993 holding that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

(2.) SHRI Jani, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submits that the land, in fact, was jointly owned by the petitioners, but, no notice was issued to petitioner Nos.2 to 7 and in absence of notice to petitioner Nos.2 to 7, the proceedings under Section 65 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ("the Act" for short) could not be continued, nor a final order could be made against the interest of the petitioners. It is also submitted that the petitioners had already obtained permission for non -agricultural use and under the circumstances, the State would not be entitled to resume possession of the property.

(3.) SHRI Pujari, learned Counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitted that the notice was issued to petitioner No.1, petitioner Nos.2 to 5 are his sons, while petitioner Nos.6 and 7 are grandsons of petitioner No.1. According to him, it is not the case of the petitioners that petitioner No.1 had no cordial relations with other petitioners or was acting contrary to their interest. He submits that grant of non -agricultural use permission subsequent to the lapses of the years 1983 -84, 1984 -85 and 1986 -87 would not allow the petitioners to argue that there were no lapses at all.