VANKAR GANESHBHAI NANJIBHAI Vs. BALUBHA MOHBATSINH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Shri S.V. Parmar, learned Counsel for the petitioner; Shri H.M.Jadeja, learned Counsel for the respondents No. 1 and 2; Ms. Nisha M. Parikh, learned AGP for the respondents No. 3 and 4.

(2.) The short facts necessary for disposal of the present writ application are that, in ceiling proceedings against Balubha Mohabatsinh, vide order dated 20th May, 1977, certain extent of the land was declared excess and the said Balubha Mahobatsinh was directed to hand over possession of the excess land. Being aggrieved by the order dated 20th May, 1977, the said Balubha Mahobatsinh preferred an appeal before the Deputy Collector, who dismissed the same on 11.5.81. The order dated 11.5.81 was not immediately challenged within limitation, but the said Balubha Mohabatsinh under some ill-advice or because of misconception of law filed yet another appeal challenging the very same order dated 20th May, 1977 before the same Deputy Collector, the Deputy Collector dismissed another appeal vide his order dated 30th April, 1994 holding that such appeal was not maintainable. The said Balubha Mohabatsinh, being aggrieved by the orders dated 11.5.81 and 30.4.94 filed two revisions before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal submitting, inter alia, that the orders passed by the Deputy Collector were bad and the order dated 20th May, 1977 was also bad. The Tribunal held that another appeal challenging the order dated 20th May, 1977 was not maintainable in view of the dismissal of the first appeal. It was also observed that the order dated 11th May, 1981 has been challenged somewhere in the year 1994 and as there was no justifiable ground to condone the delay, revision could not be entertained. From the said order, it would be clear that the revision against the order dated 11.5.81 was dismissed as barred by limitation, while against the order dated 30th April, 1994, revision was dismissed as not maintainable. The said order came to be challenged in Special Civil Application No. 4193 of 1998, the petition was dismissed on 7.9.98, holding, inter alia, that the Tribunal was absolutely justified in dismissing the revision.

(3.) Kamlaba, wife of Balubha Mahobatsinh filed Special Civil Application No. 4669 of 1998 submitting, inter alia, that at the time of allotment of the Page 0826 excess land alleged to be belonging to Balubha Mahobatsinh, her land were allotted in favour of present petitioner Vankar Ganeshbhai Nanjibhai. The said Special Civil Application No. 4669 of 1998 was dismissed by the High Court, holding that the petition was raising disputes as to identity of the land, possession of which was delivered to the allottee. The High Court granted liberty in favour of Kamlaba Balubha Rana that she could approach the revenue authorities for identification of land.