DHANRAJ DEVELOPERS PVT LTD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Dhanraj Developers Pvt. Ltd.-petitioner is before this Court being aggrieved by order dated 20.05.2005 passed by respondent no.1-Secretary (Appeals), whereby the Secretary (Appeals) has held that the reasons set out in the Show Cause Notice dated 10.11.2004 stand established and therefore, the order passed by the Taluka Development Officer, Rajkot bearing No.TP/ Jamin/ B.Kh.P. Vashi 114/ 18 dated 11.01.1999 is quashed. The Secretary (Appeals) has also recorded that as error is with regard to the jurisdiction, District Development Officer, Rajkot is directed to place the matter before the Working Committee of the District Panchayat and to proceed with the matter in accordance with law.

(2.) Learned advocate Mr.Percy C. Kavina for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to the facts which led to the filing of the present petition. The petitioner had purchased the land in the year 2001 by registered sale deed. This land was granted Non-Agricultural (NA) Permission on an application being made by the predecessor in title of the petitioner on 03.11.1998 by order dated 11.01.1999 by the Taluka Development Officer.

(3.) Learned advocate for the petitioner invited attention of the Court to the Notification issued by the Collector's Office, Rajkot on 01.02.1986. Under the said Notification the villages surrounding Rajkot were divided into Classes 'A' to 'E'. It so happened that Village 'Munjka' was the village, a part of which was in Class 'A' and the rest of the village was in Class 'E'. So far as the villages which were falling within Class 'A' for the lands of those villages, NA Permission was required to be considered and granted by the District Panchayat and not by Taluka Panchayat. But so far as the villages which were falling in Class 'E' applications requesting for grant of NA Permission were to be considered by Taluka Panchayat. In the present case, as mentioned hereinabove, it so happened that a part of Village 'Munjka' fell in Class 'A' and rest of the village fell in Class 'E'. The part of Village 'Munjka' which fell in Class 'A' is set out in the Notification, Survey Nos.1 to 32, 46 to 48 and 50 to 77 as a whole and Survey Nos.33, 34, 36, 37, 42, 44, 45 and traverse 49 (in part) fell in Class 'A'. The same Notification also sets out that a part of the following villages fall in Class 'E' category and then at serial no.30, Village 'Munjka' is mentioned. The aforesaid position is clarified in the map, which is obtained by the petitioner under the Right To Information Act, which is produced on record in Civil Application No.10449 of 2006 in Civil Application No.12752 of 2005 in Special Civil Application No.14767 of 2005. The aforesaid map clearly depicts that a part of Survey No.42 is within the limits of 5 KMs, as is the criteria for deciding its category/ class 'A'. Whereas major part of Survey No.42 is beyond that. Therefore, it falls in Class 'E' (category).