JETHABHAI SAVJIBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITION is directed against the judgment dated 4. 4. 96 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application TEN. B. A. 71/95. By the said order, the Tribunal was pleased to set aside the orders passed by the Deputy Collector and the Mamlatdar in agricultural land ceiling proceedings. Consequently, the Tribunal was pleased to hold that the petitioner was holding 42 acres and 18 gunthas of agricultural lands against the ceiling limit of 39 acres. The Mamlatdar was directed to give option to the petitioner regarding which part of the land to be surrendered.

(2.) IN ceiling proceedings, the Mamlatdar had held that the petitioner was not holding any land in excess of ceiling limit. This order of the Mamlatdar dated 25. 8. 81 was sought to be taken in suo motu revision by the Deputy Collector. However, after initially issuing notice, the Collector upon hearing the petitioner dropped the proceedings by his order dated 27. 12. 82. State preferred revision against the said order before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. The revision was, however, filed in the year 1995.

(3.) HAVING heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties, I find that gross delay of 13 years in filing the revision application was not satisfactorily explained. There was no separate delay condonation application filed. However, delay was sought to be explained by filing an affidavit. It appears that the delay was sought to be explained by stating that the order of the lower court was available on 15. 11. 89 and it was lying with the Circle Inspector till 9. 2. 95. The Deputy Mamlatdar, Revenue received the record on 27. 6. 90. I find that the Tribunal committed serious error in accepting the above statement as sufficient explanation for gross delay of 13 years. If the papers were not collected or the judgment not promptly perused and processed, by such factors, delay cannot be explained.