SRICHAND F BALCHANDANI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an unfortunate litigation by petitioners before this Court. This writ petition clearly exhibits how arbitrarily the officers of the State of Gujarat act while dealing with the matter of citizens. Not only this, it clearly exhibits the red-tapism which is there in the officers of the State.

(2.) The facts, in brief, of the case are that the petitioner No. 1 who wanted to have agricultural land for personal cultivation moved an application for grant of permission to purchase the land admeasuring 4 acres 10 gunthas of village Kuvadva from its occupant Shri Kantilal. The application was duly processed through Mamlatdar and the Deputy Collector, under its order dated 30th June 1981, granted permission in favour of the petitioner. The occupant of the land Shri Kantilal refused to execute the document of sale because of increase in price. The time prescribed under the order dated 30th June 1981 for purchase of land was of one year within which the petitioner was required to purchase the land. As the time prescribed under the said order was due to expire, the petitioner No. 1 entered into an agreement for purchase of another piece of agricultural land in adjoining village from petitioners No. 2 and 3 and immediately moved an application on 29th March 1982 to the Deputy Collector concerned for necessary modification of the order earlier made by the said authority on 30th June 1981 in his favour. After filing the application dated 29th March 1982, the petitioner No. 1 went on sending reminders to the Deputy Collector for making necessary modification in the order dated 30th June 1981. As the period of one year was due to expire on the last day of June 1982 and the application made by the petitioner for modification of the earlier order has been processed and the same was pending for the order, he paid consideration to petitioners No. 2 and 3 and got the document executed on 2-8-1992 and his name was duly mutated in the revenue records also. The Deputy Collector concerned has not passed any order on the application of the petitioner dated 29th March 1982, but has taken it to be a case of violation of provisions of Section 54 of the Saurashtra Ordinance No. 41/49 and issued a show-cause notice dated 9-10-1983 under Rule 108(6) of the Land Revenue Rules to the petitioner to show cause why the entry made in the name of the petitioner No. 1 should not be cancelled. The Deputy Collector, by its order dated 29th October 1983, held that the land sold by petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 to petitioner No. 1 was invalid. The petitioner filed revision agaisnt the said order before the State Government which came to be dismissed under the order dated 20th April 1985. Hence this Special Civil Application before this Court.

(3.) The writ petition has come up for hearing before this Court for admission on 8-11-1985 on which date, Rule was issued and interim relief in terms of para 16(E) has been granted. So the operation of both the impugned orders has been stayed.