RAMIBEN WD O MAGANJI GOVINDJI Vs. COMPETENT OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of filing this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, the appellants who are heirs and legal representatives of Maganji Govindji, have challenged legality of judgment dated 1/05/1992 rendered by the learned Single Judge, in Special Civil Application No.2463/90, by which order dated April 5, 1988 passed by the Competent Authority and Deputy Collector, Urban Land Ceiling, Surat declaring 6088 sq.mts. of lands as excess land under the provisions of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 as affirmed by order dated 5/07/1989 passed by the Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal in Appeal No. 51/88 is upheld.

(2.) The appellants are heirs and legal representatives of deceased Maganji Govindji. The deceased was holding lands bearing survey no.68 admeasuring 4654 sq.mts. and survey no.73 admeasuring 3734 sq.mts. situated in the sim of village Jahangirabad, Taluka : Choryasi, District : Surat. On coming into force of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 ("the Act" for short), the deceased filed a statement under section 6(1) of the Act before the Competent Authority specifying the location, extent, value of vacant lands held by him. The form was processed by the Competent Authority and the Competent Authority by order dated 9/01/1984 held that the deceased was holding 6088 sq.mts. as excess land. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the deceased preferred Ceiling Appeal No.478/84 before the Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal, Ahmedabad. During the pendency of the appeal before the Tribunal, original owner of the lands in question i.e. Maganji Govindji expired on February 4, 1986. The present appellants were brought on record of the appeal as heirs and legal representatives of the deceased. The Tribunal allowed the appeal by judgment dated 8/09/1987 and remanded the matter to the Competent Authority with a direction to decide the matter afresh after giving opportunity of being heard to the appellants. Though the matter was remanded to the Competent Authority, a finding was recorded by the Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal to the effect that the appellants were entitled to only one unit under the provisions of the Act. Pursuant to order of remand passed by the Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal in Appeal No.478/84, the Competent Authority held inquiry again and gave opportunity of being heard to the appellants. However, the Competent Authority by an order dated 5/04/1988 held that the appellants were entitled to only one unit and declared 6088 sq.mts. of land as excess land. Feeling aggrieved by the above-referred to order of Competent Authority, the appellants preferred Appeal No. 51/88 before Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal. During the pendency of the appeal before Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal, the appellants instituted Special Civil Application No.3903/88 and challenged the finding recorded by the Urband Land Ceiling Tribunal in Appeal No.478/84 to the effect that the appellants were entitled to only one unit. The High Court by order dated 6/04/1989 rejected the petition at the admission stage and directed the Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal to decide appeal on merits after considering all the facts. The Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal accordingly considered Appeal No.51/88 and dismissed the same by judgment and order dated May 3, 1988. The order passed by the Competent Authority on 5/04/1988 and the judgment rendered by the Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal on 5/07/1990 were challenged by the petitioners in Special Civil Application No. 2463/90 on several grounds. On behalf of the appellants, two contentions were urged before the learned Single Judge viz. (i) as the lands held by deceased Maganji Govindji were H.U.F. properties and not his self-acquired properties, the impugned orders were liable to be set aside, and (ii) as heirs and legal representatives of deceased Maganji Govindji were entitled to file statement before the Competent Authority under section 15(1) of the Act, Urban Land Ceiling Tribunal was not right in holding that the appellants were entitled to one unit under the Act. The learned Single Judge did not find merit in any of the submissions advanced on behalf of the appellants and, therefore, dismissed the petition by judgment dated 1/05/1992, giving rise to the present appeal.

(3.) During the pendency of the appeal, draft amendment was moved by the appellants seeking permission of the Court to amend the memorandum of Letters Patent Appeal. Draft amendment was allowed by the Court and the appellants were permitted to amend memorandum of Letters Patent Appeal. By amendment, the appellants contended that survey nos. 68 & 73 of village Jahangirabad, Taluka : Choryasi were agricultural lands and as zoning certificate dated 21/07/1998 shows that those survey numbers were included in residential zone of Surat Urban Development Authority ('SUDA') with effect from January 31, 1986, the provisions of the Act were not applicable to the lands in question and 6088 sq.mts. of land could not be declared as excess land. In order to substantiate the claim advanced by way of amendment, the appellants have produced zoning certificate dated 21/07/1998 as well as village form 7 & 12 for the period from 1985 to 1988.