JAMUBHAI BABARBHAI PATEL Vs. COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order dated 26. 10. 90 passed by the Deputy Collector, Choryasi, Surat as upheld by the order dated 22nd July 1997 passed by the Additional Chief Secretary (Appeals), Government of Gujarat.

(2.) THE petitioner was granted Government land for personal cultivation by order dated 17. 3. 82 subject to certain terms and conditions. The land in question was bearing survey No. 148 paike admeasuring 10 acres and 0 gunthas of village Mora, Taluka Choryasi (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the said land' ). Condition No. 5 of the order required that the petitioner should initiate active steps for reclamation of the land within two years and should ensure that the land is reclaimed within 10 years. The condition further provides that if this requirement is breached or if subsequently also the land is not maintained in proper cultivable state, the order of grant shall be cancelled.

(3.) ASSISTANT Collector, Choryasi issued a show cause notice on 8. 6. 90 stating inter alia that the petitioner has breached the said condition and therefore why grant should not be canceled and the land should not be forfeited. The petitioner replied to the show cause notice vide his communication dated 26. 6. 90 stating, inter alia, that he has spent considerable amount of effort and money for reclamation of the land and he had to incur debt to do so and the proceedings may, therefore, be dropped. The Deputy Collector, Choryasi, however, passed order on 26. 10. 90 holding that the petitioner had breached the conditions of grant. He found that panchnama was drawn on 8. 5. 89 and 12. 5. 92 which revealed that there are no crops on the land and babool trees have grown in some parts. He also observed that the petitioner in breach of the conditions had mortgaged the land for taking loan of Rs. 8,000/- from Bank of India. He recorded the statements of the petitioner that the loan was, however, subsequently fully repaid. The Deputy Collector concluded that the petitioner had breached condition Nos. 5 and 8 of the grant order. Consequently, he canceled the grant and ordered forfeiture of the land in the Government.