Research › Search › Judgment

Gujarat High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 255 (GUJ)

SHIVAM ARUNBHAI PATEL v. STATE OF GUJARAT

2018-01-25

P.P.BHATT

body2018
JUDGMENT : 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioners with following prayers: “7(a) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit this Petition; (aa) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the order passed by the Ld. Collector in the month of January 2014 in the Application No. N.A./U.1/Fatehwadi/ Extension- Application/2013. (aaa) That this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the order dated 12/04/2017 passed by the Ld. SSRD, Ahmedabad in Revision Application No. BKP/AMD/26/2014 filed u/s-211 of the Code, 1879; (b) That pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this Petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the execution, implementation and operation of the Order passed by the Ld. Deputy Collector in the month of January 2014 and order dated 12/04/2017 passed by the Ld. SSRD, Ahmedabad; (c) Such other and further reliefs that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice may kindly be granted.” 2. On 07.09.2017, the co-ordinate bench of this Court issued the notice of Rule and also granted the ad-interim relief in terms of para 7(b) of the petition. 3. Filtering the unnecessary details the facts of the case are such that the lands bearing survey Nos. 384 and 385 were got converted into Non- Agricultural (NA) land by the then owners of the land for which, necessary orders were passed by the Deputy Collector on 19.12.2009. On 02.01.2010, Form-6 was obtained showing that the lands were converted into NA lands vide mutation entry Nos. 4066 and 4077. On 14.07.2010 the present petitioners purchased the old tenure NA land admeasuring 10016 sq. mtrs. out of survey Nos. 384 and 7284 sq. mtrs. out of survey No. 385, situated at Fatehwadi, Taluka: Daskroi, District: Ahmedabad. Form No. 7/12 reflects the petitioners as owner of the said land. As per the condition imposed in the orders dated 19.12.2009, the petitioners were to start the work of construction within 06 months i.e. on or before 19.06.2010, however, thereafter, the then owners got the Zoning Certificate for the survey Nos. 384 and 385 from AUDA notifying that 40 meter road shall pass from the owned land i.e. survey Nos. 384 and 385, which would be acquired by AUDA under the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 and the remaining land can be used for commercial purpose. 384 and 385 from AUDA notifying that 40 meter road shall pass from the owned land i.e. survey Nos. 384 and 385, which would be acquired by AUDA under the Gujarat Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 and the remaining land can be used for commercial purpose. A draft of TP Scheme No. 88 was proposed and accordingly, Final Plot No. 48 admeasuring 10,380 mtrs. Was allocated to the petitioners for the combined survey Nos. 384 and 385. The petitioners preferred a detailed application for extension of time to the Deputy Collector (NA), Ahmedabad. Accordingly, details were sought for and eventually, the Deputy Collector passed an order in January 2014 in Application No. N.A./U.1/Fatehwadi/Extension-Application/2013 directing the petitioners to pay an amount of Rs.1,73,000/- for committing breach of condition No. 8 of the aforesaid orders. The petitioners also received a letter from Talati on 13.03.2014 to pay the said amount. Against such order, the petitioners preferred Revision Application under Section 211 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1897 before the SSRD to revise the order of the Deputy Collector, which came to be rejected on 12.04.2017, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said order, the petitioners have preferred the present petition. 4. Heard, the learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent – State. 4.1 At the outset, the learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the matter is squarely covered by a judgment of the co-ordinate bench of this Court rendered in Special Civil Application No. 16620 of 2016 decided on 22.09.2017. The learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent – State fairly conceded the fact that the case of the present petitioners is covered by the decision, referred and relied by the learned advocate for the petitioners, however, upon instructions, he submits that the State has decided to assail the said decision in Letters Patent Appeal and accordingly, he requests that present petition may not be allowed at this stage. 5. 5. Regard being had to the submissions made and in the facts and circumstances of the case, more particularly, considering the fact that the petitioners were granted NA permission vide orders dated 19.12.2009 and thereafter, it was the first application seeking extension of time for starting construction work and as it appears from the record that various grounds that were raised in the application seeking extension were not properly considered and appreciated by the respondent – authority and the fact that the co-ordinate bench of this Court had an occasion to deal with the issue analogous to the present one in the decision referred and relied upon by the petitioners, a perusal of the same reveals that the said decision is squarely applicable to the facts of the case on hand and accordingly, without entering into the depth of the case, this Court is of the view that the orders impugned herein are required to be quashed and set aside. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has apprised that the State is desirous of challenging the aforesaid decision of the co-ordinate bench relied by the petitioners, however, it is a fact that nothing such has come on record so far. 6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, present petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the Deputy Collector in Application No. N.A./U.1/Fatehwadi/Extension-Application/2013 in January 2014 and the order dated 12.04.2017 passed by the SSRD, Ahmedabad in Revision Application No. BKP/AMD/26/2014 filed under Section 211 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs.