GANIBHAI MUSABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are two petitions challenging the order passed by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-sec (1) of sec. 88D of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Since both these petitions involve a similar question they were heard together and this judgment will cover the subject matter of both the petitions.

(2.) The petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 901 of 1963 is the owner of certain lands situated at Vadod in the Anand Taluka and he made an application before the Mamlatdar Anand under sec. 88C of the Act for the grant of an exemption certificate and a certificate dated 19th October 1959 was granted to him under that section by the Tenancy Aval Karkun of Anand. That certificate granted under sec. 88C was revoked by an order dated January 1963 passed by the Under Secretary to the Government of Gujarat Revenue and Agriculture Department by virtue of the powers under sub-sec. (1) of sec. 88D of the Act. In the order that was passed under that section it was stated that the State Government was satisfide that the annual income of the petitioner exceeded Rs. 1500 and that therefore the State Government directed that with effect from the date of the order the lands shall cease to be exempt from the provisions of secs. 32 to 32R of the Act from which they were exempt under sec. 88C of the Act and that the certificate 8ranted to the petitioner under sec. 88C by the Mamlatdar of Anand in respect of the lands should stand revoked. According to the petitioner the order passed under sec. 88D of the Act is a judicial order and before passing such an order it was incumbent on the State Government to hear the petitioner and to give him an opportunity of being heard. According to the petitioner the revocation of the certificate rendered the petitioners land liable to compulsory sale under sec. 32 of the Act and affected the property rights of the petitioner and it was incumbent on the State Government to hold an inquiry and to hear the petitioner before an order under sec. 88D was passed. The petitioner also urged in his petition that the order under sec. 88D was passed without hearing him and without giving him an opportunity of being heard and that the order was passed in contravention of the principles of natural justice. In the affidavit-in-reply to the petition it was stated that a tenant of land Survey No. 416 (Paiki) of Vadod had made an application on 28th December 1961 with a request to revoke the exemption certificate granted to the landlord under sec. 88C on the ground that the landlords income exceeded Rs. 1 500 That application was sent to the Collector for report and a statement of the petitioner was recorded in the course of an inquiry held by the Tenancy Aval Karkun. Thereafter as the Government was satisfied from the records that the annual income of the petitioner exceeded Rs. 1500.00 the certificate granted to him was revoked. The further defence that was revealed in the affidavit-in-reply was that it was not necessary to hold a further inquiry if the facts were clear from the record and that it was not incumbent upon the State Government to give an opportunity to the petitioner of being heard when in fact the facts of the case were clear from the record of the case on the petitioners own admission that his income exceeded Rs. 1 500

(3.) It thus appears that the petitioner was granted a certificate of exemption under sec. 88C of the Act on 19th October 1959 and thereafter it appears a tenant made an application to revoke the certificate and the papers were sent to the Collector for report and the petitioner was called and his statement was recorded by the Aval Karkun. Thereafter the impugned order was passed under sub-sec. (1) of sec. 88D of the Act revoking the certificate that was granted to the petitioner under sec. 880 by the Mamlatdar of Anand. The order revoking the certificate was passed under the signature of the Under Secretary to the Government of Gujarat Revenue and Agriculture Department.