VINODBHAI RAMNATH CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short facts of the case are that Chhotabhai Shanabhai became the owner of the land admeasuring 4638 sq. mtrs., bearing Survey No.3205/6/7 at Hirji Parti, Nadiad, District Kheda. On 22.6.1970, the said Chhotabhai Shanabhai sold the said land to one Chunibhai Kuberbhai Dalwadi. The entry pursuant to the sale deed was also entered in the revenue record being No.10778 dated 22.6.1970. On 11.9.1978, T.P. Scheme appears to have been sanctioned and the original land was given final plot No.462 in the Scheme by reconstitution. In 1989, the said Chunibhai Kuberbhai Dalwadi applied to the District Collector to convert the land for N.A. use and ultimately the permission came to be granted for converting the land for N.A. use by the District Collector by order dated 20.1.1990. It appears that after the plots were sold, on 30.4.1996, i.e. roughly more than 5? years the proceedings were initiated by the State Government for exercising the revisional power against the order of the Collector for grant of permission of N.A. on various grounds, inter alia, that the permission was required to be obtained when the land was purchased by Chunibhai Kuberbhai from Chhotabhai Shanabhai and other grounds were also stated for non -approval of the plan etc. Ultimately, the State Government passed the order on 24.7.1998, whereby the order of the Collector for grant of N.A. permission was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Collector. It is under these circumstances, the present petition.

(2.) I have heard Mr.Sanjiv Dave, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.Chhaya, learned AGP for the State.

(3.) IT appears that there is no dispute on the aspect that the power is exercised by the State Government after the period of about more than five years. As regards the delay is concerned, it may vary from facts to facts, but if the situation has become irreversible to the extent that the rights of the parties are substantially altered in the manner that if the exercise of the power is permitted at a belated stage, not only great injustice would be caused, but the situation cannot be reversed, then in such circumstances, the delay cannot be leniently viewed and the authorities cannot be permitted to exercise the power after unreasonable period of delay. At this stage, reference may be made to the decision of this Court in case of "Rajul Co -op. Housing Society Limited. v. State of Gujarat and Ors.", reported in 1985(2) GLR, 1187, wherein while considering the question of delay, this Court found that as the petitioner has already constructed the flats over the land and it is now not in a position to return the land to the Government, if it is desirous of recovering the price of the land at the revised rate, the exercise of the power after a period of about 5? years was found as unreasonable and this Court followed the decision of the Apex Court in case of "State of Gujarat v. Raghav Natha", reported in 10 GLR, 992; "Habib Nasin Khanji v State", reported in 11 GLR, 307; and "Bhagwanji Bawanji v. State", reported in 12 GLR, 156 for the exercise of power by the State Government under Section 211 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code.