JUDGMENT A. J. DESAI, J. 1. Draft amendment is allowed. To be carried out forthwith. 2. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr. J.K.Shah waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. 3. With consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. 4. By way of present petition under Articles 14, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed as under : 42.(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to admit and allow the present petition. 3. With consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing. 4. By way of present petition under Articles 14, 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed as under : 42.(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to admit and allow the present petition. (B) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned orders dated 7.7.2016, rendered in Revision Application No.18/2013, passed by the respondent No.1, order of the Collector, Rajkot dated 6.2.2013, order of the Deputy Collector, Rajkot dated 15.10.2011, with all consequential effects including deletion of mutation Entry No.2634 and the correction order of the Mamlatdar, Lodhika (Annexures-A , EE, AA, BB and CC respectively); (C) Be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondent-authorities to issue the Occupancy Certificate of the subject matter land or to consider the petitioners' representation dated 06.09.2016, in accordance with law (Annexure-GG) alternatively, be pleased to direct the respondent-Authorities to complete the proceedings in accordance with the order of the Collector, Rajkot dated 1.2.1999 (Annexure-T), communication of the Deputy Collector, Rajkot dated 10.3.1999 (Annexure-U) and the notice issued thereby dated 31.3.1999 (Annexure-V); (D) In light of the petitioners' continuous possession of more than 78 years over the subject matter land, be pleased to direct the respondents by way of issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction to regularize such possession, under the provisions of Saurashtra Land Reforms Act / other Government Scheme / Resolutions; (E) Be pleased to hold and declare by issuance of appropriate writ, order or direction that the order of the Mamlatdar dated 1.7.1962 being quashed and set aside in appeal, cannot be relied upon without undertaking any further proceedings in accordance with law; (F) Pending admission, hearing and final disposed of the petition be pleased to restrain the respondents, their agents and servants not to disturb or interfere with the petitioners' title and possession over the subject matter land of Village: Khirasara, Taluka: Lodhika, District: Rajkot; (G) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to direct the respondents not to act in furtherance of the mutation Entry No.2634, in any manner whatsoever being passed on the basis of the ex-parte and illegal direction of the superior Authority; (H) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to direct the respondents to maintain statusquo with respect to title and possession of the subject matter land; (I) Be pleased to grant ex-parte interim relief as prayed for herein above in paragraph No.42 (F), (G) and (H); (J) Be pleased to grant other and further relief/s as the nature and circumstances of the case may require." 5. The matter was listed for hearing before the Co- ordinate Bench of this Court and following order was passed on 08.12.2016 which reads as under : "Heard Mr. Amar Mithani, learned advocate for Ms. Nimisha J. Parekh, learned advocate for the petitioners. It is submitted that the petitioners are in possession of the land in question since the year 1938 as they had been granted the said land for cultivation initially, for a period of five years, by the erstwhile Ruler of the princely State of Khirasara. It is further submitted that even after independence, the names of the petitioners appeared in the Revenue record. The proceedings initiated by the Mamlatdar in the year 1962, for the removal of encroachment, culminated in an appeal before the Deputy Collector. The said proceedings have been remanded by order dated 07.07.1963. However, no proceedings have been initiated thereafter and the petitioners continue to cultivate the land. They also have their houses on the land and are in possession. The Deputy Collector, by the impugned ex-parte order dated 15.10.2011, has directed that the petitioners be evicted from the land in question and their names be removed from the Revenue record. This order has been passed without granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The order of the Deputy Collector has been confirmed by the impugned orders of the Collector and the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals). Issue Notice returnable on 03.02.2017. By way of ad-interim relief, it is directed that the status quo, as it exists today, qua the land in question, shall be maintained till then." 6. In response to the Notice of this Court, the respondent Government Authorities are represented by the learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.J.K.Shah. 7. Though the petitioners have raised several contentions with regard to right, title, interest and possession etc. with regard to the land in question, the foremost contention raised by the petitioners is that the respondent authorities have committed breach of principle of natural justice before passing the impugned orders. 8. Learned advocate Mr. 7. Though the petitioners have raised several contentions with regard to right, title, interest and possession etc. with regard to the land in question, the foremost contention raised by the petitioners is that the respondent authorities have committed breach of principle of natural justice before passing the impugned orders. 8. Learned advocate Mr. Amar Mithani for the petitioners would submit that the Deputy Collector, Rajkot (Rural) passed an order dated 15.10.2011, by which revenue entries mutated in the year 1969 with regard to the land in question and as the petitioners' predecessor name is reflected since the year 1952 and continued thereafter, was ordered to be cancelled/deleted and it was ordered to evict the petitioners from the land in question. Accordingly the Mamlatdar has passed the order dated 04.01.2012. These orders have been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The said orders having come to the notice, the petitioners filed appeal before the District Collector, who passed the order dated 06.02.2013. The said order has also been passed without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. Therefore, the impugned orders were challenged by the petitioners by way of revision application before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department. However, the said revision application is rejected by an order dated 07.07.2016. He would submit that certain factual aspect which was brought to the notice of authorities below that the order dated 01.07.1962 was under challenge by way of an appeal and whereby the matter was remanded, the same has not been properly dealt with by the authorities, and therefore, the impugned orders are required to be quashed and set aside and the matter may be remanded back. Even the Collector has passed the order beyond the scope of appeal, which was preferred by the petitioners. He, therefore, would submit that an appropriate order may be passed. 9. On the other hand, learned AGP Mr.J.K. Shah appearing for the respondents would submit that, as far as giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners is concerned, the revisional authority has examined the case on merits, and therefore, the petition may not be entertained. It is submitted that if the Court is inclined to remand the matter to the authorities in that case it is requested that the Court may not express any opinion on merits and pass appropriate order. 10. It is submitted that if the Court is inclined to remand the matter to the authorities in that case it is requested that the Court may not express any opinion on merits and pass appropriate order. 10. Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the fact that the orders passed by Mamlatdar, Deputy Collector and Collector are without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, therefore the same are required to be quashed and set aside, since the same are passed in breach of principles of natural justice. However, as agreed by the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is remanded back to the District Collector, Rajkot for fresh consideration and all the orders impugned in the petition are hereby quashed and set aside. The District Collector shall provide an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and shall examine the documentary evidence which may be supplied by the petitioners within a period of four weeks from today. The District Collector shall pass fresh order without being influenced by the earlier orders passed by his predecessor or his superior. 11. It is made clear that this Court has not examined the right, title and interest of the land in question as claimed by the petitioners. 12. With the above observation and direction, the petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.