HITENDRABHAI BHIKHABHAI KARAD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the applicants call in question the legality and validity of the order dated 27th June 2014 passed by the Collector, Surat, by which the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Palsana dated 27th February 2007 pursuant to an inquiry under Section 37(2) of the Land Revenue Code as well as the order dated 7th May 2010 passed by the Deputy Collector in appeal came to be quashed and set aside.

(2.) The facts giving rise to this application may be summarised as under: 2. 1 The predecessor-in-title of the petitioners namely Khadiya Kaliya - father of Chhanabhai Khandubhai Umariya and others were holding agricultural land bearing original revenue survey No. 216 admeasuring 2 Acres and 32 Gunthas situated at the village: Chalthan, Taluka: Palsana, District: Surat. The land was being cultivated by the predecessor as a village servant. On abolition of the Bombay Service Inam (Service to community) Act, 1951, the land came to be resumed by the Government vide order of the Deputy Collector and an entry in that regard came to be mutated in the village form No. 6 being the entry No. 194 dated 1st February 1959. The said land in accordance with the provisions of the Act, was re-granted to the grantee i.e. the village servant namely Khandubhai Kaliya. An entry to that effect was mutated in the village form No.6 being an entry No. 299 dated 22nd July 1961. Out of the said land, the successor of Khandu Kaliya namely Chhanabhai Khandubhai Umariya sold half of the portion to one Vankali Kalyanbhai by a registered sale deed and the balance half to the extent of 5261 sq. mtrs. was sold to the petitioners herein by a registered sale deed No. 992 dated 15th May 2007. 2. 2 The case of the petitioners herein is that despite the fact that the land was in cultivation and possession of the original landlord and was re-granted after being resumed to the original grantee, the name of P.W.D. was wrongly entered in the 7/12 extract from 1957 onwards. 2. 3 The seller namely Chhanabhai Khandubhai Umariya and others filed an application to the Mamlatdar to delete the name of the P.W.D. from the village form No. 12 on 12th July 2004. 2. 4 The Mamlatdar initiated proceedings under Section 37(2) of the Land Revenue Code. After a detailed inquiry and consideration of the revenue record and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent No. 4, the Mamlatdar came to the conclusion that the name of P.W.D. had been wrongly entered into the revenue record and the petitioners were the lawful owners of the land in question. 2. 5 The respondent No.4 challenged the order passed by the Mamlatdar before the Deputy Collector by filing an appeal. The petitioners raised a preliminary objection before the Deputy Collector as regards the maintainability of the appeal. However, the Deputy Collector proceeded to hear the appeal on merits and vide order dated 7th May 2010 affirmed the order of the Mamlatdar and dismissed the appeal. 2. 6 The respondent No.4, thereafter, filed a revision application on 5th August 2010 before the Collector. The Collector, almost after a period of two years, issued notice dated 25th May 2012 and fixed the hearing of the revision application. Before the Collector, it was submitted that the order passed by the Mamlatdar under Section 37(2) of the Land Revenue Code, in substance, could be said to have been passed by the Collector, and therefore, neither the Deputy Collector nor the Collector as the higher revenue officer could have looked into the order passed by the Mamlatdar. 2. 7 The Collector allowed the revision application filed by the respondent No.4 herein, and thereby quashed the orders passed by the Mamlatdar as well as the Deputy Collector respectively. 2. 8 The petitioners, being dissatisfied with the order passed by the Collector, filed a revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal under the provisions of the Bombay Revenue Tribunal Act, 1957. A Bench of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, vide order dated 15th August 2014, directed the parties to maintain status quo. While the matter was pending before the Tribunal, the Government issued a Notification in the month of March 2016, by which the powers of appeals and revision, in case of the original order under Section 37(2) of the Land Revenue Code, came to be delegated to the Special Secretary, Revenue (Appeals). In such circumstances, the Tribunal forwarded the files to the Special Secretary.

(3.) In such circumstances referred to above, the petitioners are here before this Court with this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India questioning the legality and validity of the order passed by the Collector. Submissions On Behalf of The Petitioners: