J. N. PATEL, J. ( 1 ) RULE. Mr. Desai, Ld. AGP waives service of rule on behalf of respondents. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties matter is taken up for final hearing today. ( 2 ) THE short facts of the case are that the petitioner-society which is a Milk Producers coop. Society was allotted the land for a period of seven years vide order, dated 18. 10. 1979 admeasuring 10 acres bearing S. No. 185/3 and 185/4. The said land was allotted for joint and common cultivation of grass over the land for the members of the society. The said period of lease was extended upto 17. 10. 2000 and 1. 6. 02 and thereafter the society applied to the Dist. Collector for extension of period for a further period of 5 years. It appears that it came on record through the Prant Officer that the petitioner society over the said land has grown trees and the income is derived by disposal of the wood and therefore as per letter, dated 14. 10. 03 the dist. Collector, Mehsana informed the petitioner society that the society has earned the income of Rs. 2,00,336/by growing trees and the disposal of wood out of cutting of the said trees and therefore if the society is desirous to deposit the total income of Rs. 2,00,336/with the Govt and is further ready to give undertaking that without prior permission of the authority the said trees shall not be cut, the matter can be considered for extension of the period of the lease. It appears that the petitioner society instead of paying the amount and giving undertaking submitted the reply and neither steps were taken for depositing the amount nor any undertaking of the society was submitted. Thereafter, the dist. Collector Mehsana ultimately forfeited the land with the trees standing thereon and it is further ordered to take appropriate legal action for misappropriation of the amount of the Govt. It appears that the petitioner carried the matter before the State Govt by preferring revision application and the said revision is dismissed as per the order, dated 30. 6. 2004 and under these circumstances the petitioner has approached this court by this petition. ( 3 ) HEARD Mr. Vyas for the petitioner and Mr. Desai, ld. AGP for the respondent authorities. 6. 2004 and under these circumstances the petitioner has approached this court by this petition. ( 3 ) HEARD Mr. Vyas for the petitioner and Mr. Desai, ld. AGP for the respondent authorities. It may be recorded that this matter was considered for the first time on 1. 11. 2004 and this court has passed the following order: Mr. Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner states that the petitioner society shall pay Rs. 75,000/ (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) by 30th November, 2004 and remaining amount by 31st December, 2004 towards the penalty. The petition is essentially for getting some time to make the payment. 2. In view of the above, notice returnable on 7th December, 2004. Meanwhile, status-quo qua the land in question shall be maintained on condition that the petitioner, without prejudice to the further orders which may be passed by this Court and without prejudice to the rights and conditions in this petitions, shall pay the amount of Rs. 75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) with the office of the District Collector on or before 30th November, 2004 and remaining amount of Rs. 1,25,000/ (Rupees One Lac Twenty Five Thousand only) on or before 31st December, 2004. It is made clear that upon failure to deposit the amount within the aforesaid time limit by the petitioner, the ad-interim relief shall automatically stand vacated. D. S. Permitted. " ( 4 ) MR. VYAS for the petitioner submitted that as ordered by this court amount of Rs. 75,000/- is deposited on 18/23. 11. 04 and Rs. 1,25,000/- is deposited on 13. 12. 2004 by the petitioner society and placed on record the copy of challan for such purpose for depositing the amount of Rs. 2 lacs with the State Govt. He further states that the petitioner society is ready to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 336/- and also reasonable interest as may be ordered by this court. He also submitted that the petitioner society has no objection in giving undertaking to the Collector as desired by him as per letter dated 14. 10. 03 that the trees which are grown over the land shall not be cut without prior permission of the competent authority. ( 5 ) MR. DESAI, Ld. AGP has left the matter to the court for passing appropriate orders. 10. 03 that the trees which are grown over the land shall not be cut without prior permission of the competent authority. ( 5 ) MR. DESAI, Ld. AGP has left the matter to the court for passing appropriate orders. ( 6 ) IT appears that there is no dispute on the point regarding the allotment of the land by the Government to the petitioner society for the purpose of growing gross for its members. There is also no dispute on the point that the period of lease has expired and the petitioner had applied for extension of lease period. There is also no dispute on the point that prior to consideration of the application for extension of lease period the Dist. Collector had given to opportunity to the petitioner society to deposit the amount and to give undertaking as mentioned in letter, dated 14. 10. 03. ( 7 ) THE stand of the District Collector and the State govt was that the land was allotted for the purpose of growing grass and the trees should not have been grown by the petitioner society and even the construction of rooms for labourers also should not have been made. Whereas the defence of the petitioner society was that the rooms were constructed for the labourers for the purpose of growing grass and the trees were also grown for the benefit of the members and for providing fodder and nilgiri and Limda trees since certain members of the petitioner society are also having camel as their cattle. ( 8 ) SO far as the construction of two rooms for residence of the labourers is concerned it can be said as an incidental purpose for utilisation of the land for growing grass and therefore if it is for the incidental purpose of taking care of grass through labourers as such can not be said to be a breach of the condition. ( 9 ) SO far as growing of grass and income derived therefrom is concerned I would have considered the matter further, however, since the petitioners themselves have voluntarily agreed to deposit the income with the government and have also agreed to pay the reasonable amount of interest, I find that a lenient view can be taken, more particularly, since the Collector himself had also given opportunity to the petitioner society vide letter, dated 14. 10. 10. 03 calling upon them to deposit the amount and give undertaking for the purpose of considering the application for extension of period of lease. Even otherwise also as observed earlier out of the amount of Rs. 2,00,336/- the petitioner has already deposited the amount of Rs. 2 lacs in pursuance of the interim order passed and the balance amount is required to be deposited is only Rs. 336/ -. As the petitioner has enjoyed the amount after 14. 10. 03, the revenue of the govt is required to be compensated with reasonable interest which would be around 10% to 12% p. a. and the learned advocate for the petitioner has agreed to pay the amount of Rs. 25,000/- towards interest for the principal amount of Rss. 2,00,336/ -. Considering the facts and circumstances, I find that the amount of Rs. 25,000/- can be said to be as reasonable amount for compensating the loss caused to the Govt for the interest and when the petitioner is ready to pay the said amount no further discussion is required on the said aspect. ( 10 ) IN the result, the petitioner would be required to pay the amount of Rs. 25,336/- to the Government and the petitioner would also be required to give undertaking to the Dist. Collector declaring that the trees grown over the land shall not be cut off without prior permission as per letter, dated 14. 10. 03 and if such direction is complied with by the petitioner within a period of ten weeks from today the District Collector shall consider the matter for granting of extension of lease period which was requested by the petitioner in the light of letter dated 14. 10. 2003. In view of the observations made hereinbefore, the nondeposit of amount or not giving the undertaking shall not operate as bar to the petitioner in pursuing the matter seeking extension of lease period in accordance with law. ( 11 ) IN view of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order dated 28. 11. 2003 and its confirmation thereof by the State Govt as per the order dated 30. 6. 04 for forfeiture of the land in question and for giving permission to take legal action are quashed and set aside on the condition that the petitioner pays the amount of rs. 2,25,336/- with the State Govt and gives undertaking as per letter dated 14. 10. 6. 04 for forfeiture of the land in question and for giving permission to take legal action are quashed and set aside on the condition that the petitioner pays the amount of rs. 2,25,336/- with the State Govt and gives undertaking as per letter dated 14. 10. 03 copy whereof is at annexure "h" with the District collector within a period of ten weeks from today. As the petitioner has already deposited the amount of Rs. 2 lacs pending the petition, the petitioner shall be now required to deposit the additional amount of Rs. 25,336/- only with undertaking as referred to hereinabove. Since the condition is complied with by the petitioner and the petitioner has deposited the amount of Rs. 25,336/- with the undertaking, the matter shall be considered by the Collector in accordance with law for the purpose of considering the application for extension of lease period and nondeposit of amount and/or non-giving of undertaking shall not come in the way of the petitioner in pursuing the application for extension of lease period in accordance with law. It is made clear that while considering the application for extension of lease period, the Collector shall decide the same as per the policy of the State Govt prevailing from time to time keeping in view the observations made by this court hereinabove in this judgment. ( 12 ) THE petition is partly allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Considering the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. .