SHUKRIBEN JIVLABHAI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in which the petitioners have prayed that the order dated 9.9.2019 passed by the respondent­SSRD be quashed and set aside.

(2.) Heard learned advocate Ms. Sonal Vyas for the petitioners and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Bharat Vyas for the respondents authorities.

(3.) It is submitted by learned advocate for the petitioners that there are various parcels of land situated at village Tanki, Taluka Dharampur, District Valsad belonging to the grandmother of the petitioners namely Jamniben Ramubhai i.e. land bearing survey no.59, 60/1 paiki, 60/1/1, 60/1/2. Entry no.125 was mutated in the revenue record with regard to the aforesaid parcels of land. It is submitted that after the death of Jamniben Ramubhai, the land in question were mutated in the name of Class­I heirs i.e. Shukriben, Budhabhai and minor Nirmaben. The name of Budhabhai was mentioned as the guardian of minor Nirmaben. Accordingly, entry no.354 was mutated in the revenue record on 7.1.1998. It is the case of the petitioners that their names continued in the revenue record along with Budhabhai Jivlabhai. However, the names of the petitioners were deleted from the revenue record and the petitioners were not aware about the said aspect till 2013. When the petitioners came to know, they filed objection dated 15.3.2018 before the respondent­District Development Officer and raised the objection that the permission sought for by Budhabhai Jivlabhai for the purpose of selling the land in favour of Madhukantaben may not be granted in his favour. Learned advocate has referred to the objection dated 15.3.2018 given by the petitioner no.3/1 and 3/2 to the District Development Officer, copy of which is placed on record at page nos.23 of the compilation. It is submitted that though the petitioners raised the objection before the District Development Officer, without considering the said objections, District Development Officer passed an order dated 11.12.2018, whereby, he had granted permission to sell the land in question in favour of Madhukantaben. The petitioners, therefore, filed revision application before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department. Special Secretary, Revenue Department, vide order dated 9.9.2019, rejected the said revision application and therefore the petitioners have filed the present petition.