JAYTABHAI BADHABHAI HUDAD Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Shri Mengdey, learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.

(2.) BY way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for an appropriate writ, direction and order quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 8. 10. 2001 passed by the Deputy Collector (Annexure B), the impugned order dated 11. 10. 2002 passed by the Deputy Collector qua the petitioner (Annexure C) and the impugned order dated 6. 11. 2008 passed by the respondent No. 2 (Annexure D ). Shri Shital Patel, learned Advocate for the petitioner has stated at the Bar that if the order passed by the respondent No. 1 dated 6. 11. 2008 in not condoning the delay in preferring the revision application against the order passed by the Deputy Collector dated 11. 10. 2002 is set aside and the matter is remanded to the respondent No. 1 on imposing certain cost, petitioner does not press the present petition qua challenging the order passed by the Deputy Collector dated 8. 10. 2001 and the order dated 11. 10. 2002.

(3.) IT is not in dispute that being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Deputy Collector dated 8. 10. 2001 confirmed by the Collector, Junagadh by order dated 11. 10. 2002 petitioner had preferred revision application before the Secretary (Appeals) Revenue Department, State of Gujarat. There was a delay of approximately four years in preferring the revision application and, therefore, an application to condone the delay in preferring the revision application was submitted, which came to be rejected by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat by impugned order dated 6. 11. 2008. Hence, petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.