M. R. CALLA, J. ( 1 ) ). Rule. Mr. T. H. Sompura, learned Assiatant. Government Pleader, waives service of the notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent. ( 2 ) ). At the request of both the sides, this Special Civil Application is taken up for final hearing. ( 3 ) ). It is very clear from the order passed by the Urban Land Tribunal that the question regarding the set back was to be decided suitably by the Competent Authority. This order was passed by the Additional Land tribunal and Secretary to Government, Revenue Department, on 22nd February 1988, while computing the excess vacant land made by the Competent Authority. The order dated 22nd February 1988 passed by the additional Land Tribunal and Secretary to Government, Revenue Department also shows that a copy of this order was endorsed to the Competent Authority and Additional Collector, Baroda, along with the case papers. It appears that the present petitioners under some mistaken belief or mistaken advice, approached the Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Gujarat, on 23rd March 1989 and thereupon, and order was passed on 21st July 1993, rejecting the petitioners request for granting exemption under Section 30 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 ( the Act" for short) with regard to the land for set backs and, thereafter the present Special Civil Application has been filed. ( 4 ) ). Mr. T. H. Sompura, learned A. G. P. Submitted that the petitioners should have approached the concerned Competent Authority rather than the Secretary, Revenue Department. That may be so, but the fact remains that the Competent Authority itself was under an obligation to decide the question with regard to the set backs as was directed by the Additional Urban Land Tribunal on 22nd February 1988, when a copy of the said order along with the case papers had been sent to the Competent Authority. The parties are not in a position to say as to whether any order has been passed by the Competent Authority after 22nd February 1988 or not on the question regarding the set backs and Mr. Sompura, learned A. G. P. Has submitted that the concerned Competent Authority will not be able to pass any order, now contrary to the order passed by the Secretary, Revenue Department on 21st July 1993 in this matter. ( 5 ) ). Sompura, learned A. G. P. Has submitted that the concerned Competent Authority will not be able to pass any order, now contrary to the order passed by the Secretary, Revenue Department on 21st July 1993 in this matter. ( 5 ) ). It is obvious that the order passed by the Urban Land Tribunal is an order passed in an appeal under Section 33 of the Act and the Tribunal is the Appellate Authority of the orders passed by the Competent Authority. The Competent Authority was, therefore, under an obligation to decide the question regarding the set backs as directed by the Additional Land Tribunal on 22nd February 1988. The petitioners approaching the Secretary, Revenue Department through letter dated 23rd March 1989 may be irrelevant, but that by itself is no answer against the further logical proceedings which should have taken place before the Competent Authority and Additional Collector, Baroda after the order had been passed by the Tribunal on 22nd February 1988. ( 6 ) ). In the facts and circumstances of the case, the concerned Competent Authority and Additional Collector, baroda, is directed to decide the question regarding the set backs as ordered dated 22nd February 1988, if the same has not been decided by the Competent Authority and in doing so, the order passed by the Revenue department on 21st July 1993 will not come in the way of the Competent Authority and Additional Urban land Tribunal would prevail over the order passed by the Secretary, Revenue Department, on 21st July 1993. In case the Competent Authority has already passed any order after the Additional Urban Land tribunals order dated 22nd February 1988, such order would govern the rights of the parties on the question of the set backs. Of course, the parties will be at liberty to challenge such order, if need be, in separate proceedings. ( 7 ) ). This Special Civil Application is partly allowed in the terms as aforesaid. Rule is made absolute accordingly. In view of the final orders passed in this Special Civil Application, there is no need to continue the interim order passed by this Court on 19th December 1994 and the same stands automatically vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. .