HARIJAN BHANABHAI RAMABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short facts of the case are that the petitioners, who are claiming the status of the landless labourers, are belonging to the backward class of the Society. As per the petitioners, they are in possession of the land bearing Survey No.161 of Village Moti Gharnal, Taluka Deesa, District Banaskantha since more than 25 years. As per the petitioners, the land was a gaucher land i.e. the land reserved for grazing of cattle and the petitioners developed the land and they have cultivated the land for agricultural purpose and they are deriving they livelihood from the same. The petitioners made an application to the Collector for grant of the land to them, however, the said application was not granted vide order dated 18.3.1996 of the Mamlatdar. As per the petitioners, the application was also for regularising their possession and the same also was not granted. The petitioners also preferred Suit No.89 of 1996 for protecting their possession, but the injunction was not granted by the Civil Court. The petitioners carried the matter in appeal being Civil Misc. Appeal No.66/1996 and the said appeal came to be dismissed on 17.8.1996. It is under these circumstances the present petition.

(2.) MR .Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.Chhaya, learned AGP for the State.

(3.) MR .Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioners, submitted that in view of certain observations made by the Apex Court in its decisions in case of "Madhu Kishwar and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors.", reported in JT 1996(4) SC, 379; "Dalmia Cement (Bharat) Ltd. and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors.", reported in JT 1996(4) SC, 555.; and "Consumer Education and Research Centre and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.", reported in 1995(3) SCC, 42 and more particularly the observations, which are reproduced in the memo of the petition at pages 11 and 12, it is obligatory on the part of the State Authorities to consider the application of the petitioners as a special class with a view to reach socio -economic justice to the down -trodden class of the society and he, therefore, submitted that rejection of the application by the Mamlatdar on the mere ground that the land was reserved for grazing of the cattle and there was no sufficient land is illegal and, therefore, this Court may pass appropriate orders.