JUDGMENT : SUNITA AGARWAL, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The present petition has been filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation in the name of Jan Sangarsh Manch, a civil right organization through an activist named Shri.Jignesh Mevani with the contention that the cause of members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes who would fall in the category of eligible persons for allotment of surplus land is being espoused in the present petition. The prayers made in the writ petition are as under:- “(a) The petitioner prays that Honorable Court be pleased to allow the present petition and be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or directions directing the respondents to carry out all the procedure enumerated under the clause 8(g) of the GR dated 25 May, 2000, Annexure-E, in response of all land granted for cultivation to the landless till date and including all the land grantees and shown in the Annexure A.D, and G and placed before this Honorable Court the action taken report for compliance. (b) Be pleased to direct the Collectors i.e. Respondent No.2 and 4 and the DILR, respondent no3 and 5 to forthwith carry out the procedure enumerated in clause 8(g) of GR in respect of all the land granted for the district of Ahmadabad AND Surendranagar as shown in Annexure-G and handover the land to each of the beneficiaries of land and to do everything needful to ensure the beneficiary is able to cultivate his/her piece of land. (c) The Honorable Court be placed to grant interim relief in terms of prayer b above (d) The Honorable Court be pleased to direct the respondents to pay appropriate compensation in terms of money for preventing the beneficiaries from cultivating the land granted to them for cultivation. (e) The Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 1 to immediately furnish the names of grantees to whom land admeasuring 56,873 Acres, Annexure-A have been allotted. The Hon'ble Court be further pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to complete the task of land survey and handing over the possession to each grantees of above referred land and file the Action Taken Report before this Hon'ble Court immediately. The Hon'ble Court be further pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to complete the task of land survey and handing over the possession to each grantees of above referred land and file the Action Taken Report before this Hon'ble Court immediately. (f) The Hon'ble Court be further pleased to direct the respondent No.1 to furnish the details with regard to name and quantity of land allotted, surveyed and hand over to 37,353 grantees and file the Action Taken Report before this Hon'ble Court immediately.” 2. Having perused the prayers made in the writ petition, pertinent is to note that the petitioner seeks strict adherence to the procedure enumerated under Clause (8g) of the Government Resolution dated 25.05.2000, which pertains to the grant of surplus land to the landless/eligible persons. Upon perusal of prayer ‘e’ in the prayer clause of the writ petition, it may be noted that the petitioner was raising an issue with regard to the grant of surplus land admeasuring 56,873 acres, seeking direction to the respondent No.1 to complete the task of land survey and handover the possession to each grantee. 3. By order dated 13.10.2023, we required the learned Assistant Government Pleader to furnish the report to this Court of a committee which was constituted for disposal of the aforesaid land. In response thereto, an affidavit dated 08.07.2025 of the Deputy Secretary, Revenue Department, Gandhinagar has been placed before us by Ms.Manisha Lavkumar Shah, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the State Respondents. 4. In the said affidavit, it is intimated that the Revenue Department vide communication dated 07.12.2024 required the respective Collectors of each of 33 districts of the State, asking them to reverify and collate the data, which was submitted along with an affidavit dated 25.06.2024. On receipt of the Collectors’ report, some discrepancies were found in three districts. For the rest of the districts, the Collectors have affirmed their report furnished earlier after reverification having been carried out. In paragraph No. ‘7’ of the affidavit, it is, thus, stated that:- “ 7. It is submitted that in the latest data received from respective districts, approximately 53815,30,29 sq.mt. (approximately 53815 hectares) of land, having been declared surplus under Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960 (ALC Act, 1960), was available with State Government as surplus land under ALC Act, 1960. In paragraph No. ‘7’ of the affidavit, it is, thus, stated that:- “ 7. It is submitted that in the latest data received from respective districts, approximately 53815,30,29 sq.mt. (approximately 53815 hectares) of land, having been declared surplus under Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, 1960 (ALC Act, 1960), was available with State Government as surplus land under ALC Act, 1960. The total number of beneficiaries allotted from the surplus land is quantified at 12735. The area of allotted land to the said beneficiaries is 27951,02,25 sq.mt. (approximately 27951 hectares) out of which 27726,79,68 sq.mt. (approximately 27726 hectares) area of land is hand over and duly verified by Revenue Authorities. It is therefore submitted that possession has been granted for 99.2 percentage of allotted land. Possession of approximately 224,22,57 sq.mt. (approximately 224 hectares) has not been granted for various reasons, such as pendency of legal proceeding, refusal of the allottee to accept possession, allotted other government land, specific demarcation pending.” 5. As regards three districts namely Kachchh, Banaskantha and Surendranagar, it is further submitted that the respective Collectors of the said districts have sent another reports removing the discrepancies in their earlier reports. 6. With regard to District Banaskantha, the averments in paragraph Nos. ‘10’ and ‘11’ along with the table extracted therein, giving details of numbers of allottees and the surplus land pending for allotment, are also relevant to be extracted hereinunder:- “10. This communication dated 29.7.24, has been pressed into service by the petitioner, to contend that the data furnished by the authorities is clearly not verified. Hence the reliance placed on the said communication to create doubt with regard to the efficacy of the data furnished is misleading. The context sought to be derived at by the petitioner by producing the said communication is incorrect. 11. In furtherance to the process of reverification, it has been recorded that the actual land available, as surplus land received under the ALC Act, 1960 and granted is in fact higher in quantum than what was submitted in the affidavit 25.06.2024. The comparative details of the available surplus land under ALC Act, number of allottees and possession is as under: District Land available with government as surplus land (1) Allotted land from surplus land Details of possession given to the beneficiaries Surplus Land pending for allotment (5)=(1)-(3) Allotted land Pending for Possession (6)=(3)-(4) No. of Beneficiaries (2) Area sqm. The comparative details of the available surplus land under ALC Act, number of allottees and possession is as under: District Land available with government as surplus land (1) Allotted land from surplus land Details of possession given to the beneficiaries Surplus Land pending for allotment (5)=(1)-(3) Allotted land Pending for Possession (6)=(3)-(4) No. of Beneficiaries (2) Area sqm. (3) Area sq.m. (4) Data as per Affidavit filed on date. 25/06/2024. Banaskantha. 21483710 1377 20861703 20695778 622007 165925 Data as on today Banaskantha 22867171 1475 21767835 21601910 1099336 165925 7. It is, thus, stated that the grant of possession of the land admeasuring approx 16 hectares is due, because of the pendency of Special Civil Application No.9887 of 2013 before this Court. 8. For District Surendranagar, paragraph No. ‘15’ and the averments made in paragraph No. ‘16’ are relevant to be extracted hereinunder:- “15. With respect to the discrepancy in submission of data, the comparative details of the data submitted before this Hon’ble Court in affidavit dated 25.06.2024 and as on today is as under: District Land available with government as surplus land (1) Allotted land from surplus land Details of possession given to the beneficiaries Surplus Land pending for allotment (5)=(1)-(3) Allotted land Pending for Possession (6)=(3)-(4) No. of Beneficiaries (2) Area sqm. (3) Area sq.m. (4) Data as per Affidavit filed on date. 25/06/2024. Surendranagar 83178384 1674 47636393 47182306 35541991 454087 Data As per Today Surendranagar 54334495 1589 40749959 40312390 13584536 437569 16. It is most respectfully submitted that the above table demonstrates that the actual total surplus land available with the State Government as well as allotted land in the Surendranagar District is actually less than submitted before this Hon’ble Court in the previous affidavit. It is most respectfully submitted that the Resident Additional Collector, Surendranagar vide communication dated 12/03/2025 has admitted the said mistake and clarified that the same occurred on account of error with regard to unit conversion and technical error while calculating and applying formula for the same in database. The Deponent seeks unconditional apology for the inadvertent mistake and it was not the intention of the Government to present an overestimated data before this Hon’ble court.” 9. For District Kachchh, paragraph Nos. ‘18’ and ‘19’ of the affidavit are as under:- “18. In that regard, the District Collector, Kutch has re-veri data sent to the Revenue Department. The Deponent seeks unconditional apology for the inadvertent mistake and it was not the intention of the Government to present an overestimated data before this Hon’ble court.” 9. For District Kachchh, paragraph Nos. ‘18’ and ‘19’ of the affidavit are as under:- “18. In that regard, the District Collector, Kutch has re-veri data sent to the Revenue Department. During the process of reverification, it has come to the notice of the District Collector, Kutch, that inadvertently and on account of duplication of data, actual surplus land of the district was reported less in the affidavit dated 25.06.2024. The comparative details of the data submitted before this Hon’ble Court in affidavit dated 25.06.2024 and as on today is as under: District Land available with government as surplus land (1) Allotted land from surplus land Details of possession given to the beneficiaries Surplus Land pending for allotment (5)=(1)- (3) Allotted land Pending for Possession (6)=(3)- (4) No. of Beneficiaries (2) Area sq.m. (3) Area sq.m. (4) Data as per Affidavit filed on date. 25/06/2024. Kutch 37944525 917 37944525 37944525 0 0 Data As per Today. Kutch 51453083 1083 44305025 43599563 7148058 705462 19. As indicated in the table hereinabove, out of the total surplus land, under ALC Act, admeasuring 5145,30,83 sq.mt. (approximately 5145 hectares) in the District of Kutch, granting of possession to the eligible allottees, to the extent of 7,05,462 sq.mt. (approximately 70 hectare) is pending. Reasons for not having granted possession to the beneficiaries is as under :- i. 53,62 sq.mt. land of Rapar taluka – Order of status-quo passed by this Hon'ble Court in Special Civil Application No. 19173 of 2019 on 23.10.2019. ii. 70,01,00 sq.mt. (70.01 hectares) land of Bhuj taluka – The Ld. SSRD had granted order of injunction with respect to subject land admeasuring 68,41,00 sq.mt., which has been vacated on 16.10.2024. In remaining land admeasuring 16,000 sq.mt. (1.6 hectares), there are issues with respect to measurement of land.” 10. Noticing these contentions made in the affidavit filed on behalf of the Revenue Department, we may further note the statements of the affidavit made in paragraph Nos. ‘20’, ‘21’ and ‘22’ as under:- “20. In remaining land admeasuring 16,000 sq.mt. (1.6 hectares), there are issues with respect to measurement of land.” 10. Noticing these contentions made in the affidavit filed on behalf of the Revenue Department, we may further note the statements of the affidavit made in paragraph Nos. ‘20’, ‘21’ and ‘22’ as under:- “20. Further, with regard to specific contention by the Petitioner in para-6a and 6b that the authorities have not handed over the actual possession of land in 33 villages of Rapar Taluka, it is submitted that the issue in that regard has been resolved and except Gedi village of Rapar Taluka, the possession of land from remaining 32 villages has been handed over by authorities to the respective beneficiaries through 418 panchnamas carried out in presence of panchas ranging from the period 2018 to 2021. The reliance of the Petitioner on the panchnama annexed at Annexure P2 cannot be countenanced as once the authorities have handed over the possession of the land to Mandali (association), it is the responsibility of the Mandali to protect the possession of the allotted land and the authorities cannot be bound by the responsibility to protect the same after handing it over to the concerned association. With respect to Gedi village, it is submitted that the possession is not handed over on account of order of status-quo passed by this Hon'ble Court in Special Civil Application No. 19173 of 2019 on 23.10.2019. 21. With regard to specific contention of the Petitioner in para-7, it is submitted that 4 persons have filed affidavit refuting the submissions of the answering respondent. With regard to individual affidavits, at the outset submitted that the data submitted at page 1787 by way of table itself is not correct. The area of land for which possession is not granted, dispossessed and in possession does not tally with the total area of land of the four individuals referred therein. In addition thereto, with respect to individual affidavits, is submitted that: i. Affidavit of Haribhai Alabhai Parmar – The contention of the Petitioner is not correct and the possession has been granted to the allottees. ii. Affidavit of Bhadru Ramjibhai Pachanbhai – The contention of the Petitioner is not correct and the process of handing over of possession of only 5362 sq.mt. ii. Affidavit of Bhadru Ramjibhai Pachanbhai – The contention of the Petitioner is not correct and the process of handing over of possession of only 5362 sq.mt. of land is pending on account of order of status-quo passed by this Hon'ble Court in Special Civil Application No. 19173 of 2019 on 23.10.2019. iii. Affidavit of Vijaykumar Punjabhai Kagi – The contention of the Petitioner is not correct and process of handing over of possession of only approximately 70.01 hectares is pending, out of which 68.41 hectares is pending on account of order of injunction granted by the Ld. SSRD and approximately 16,000 sq.mt. (1.6 hectares) was pending on account of overlapping issue with adjoining land, the possession of which was taken over by State Bank of India. However, the District Collector has issued notice to bank and the process of taking over of possession is undergoing and the same shall be completed at the earliest. iv. Affidavit of Dafda Virjibhai Chhaganbhai – The contention of the Petitioner is not correct and and the possession has been granted to the allottees. 22. It is submitted that with regard to contention of the Petitioner that currently the land is in possession of erstwhile owner or they have taken possession from the allottee cannot be countenanced as once the Revenue Authorities have legally transferred the possession of the allotted land to the allottees, it is the responsibility of the allottees to protect their possession. The Revenue Authorities cannot be bound by the responsibility to protect the possession of the allottee after allotment, however appropriate legal proceedings are required to be initiated, in accordance with law.” 11. Taking note of the above, we find that in view of the affidavit of the Deputy Secretary, Revenue Department, from the data of transfer of possession of the allotted surplus land to the grantees, the dispute remained of various nature. In some of the matters, there are encroachments and illegal transfers by the original owners. In some matters, the possession could not be delivered on account of the litigation pending before this Court and in some, allottees have been dispossessed by some private persons. 12. Be that as it may, any dispute pertaining to non-transfer of possession to an allottee of a surplus land, can very well be raised by an individual allottee by initiating his own action by availing appropriate remedy in law. 12. Be that as it may, any dispute pertaining to non-transfer of possession to an allottee of a surplus land, can very well be raised by an individual allottee by initiating his own action by availing appropriate remedy in law. Further, the grievances raised by the petitioner about the substantial area of 53,815 hectares of land having not been allotted to the beneficiaries or the possession of the allotted land having not been handed over to the allottees, has already been met at the ends of the Revenue Authorities. As is clear from the averments made in paragraph No.’7’ of the affidavit of the Deputy Secretary, Revenue Department, extracted hereinbefore, it is pertinent to note that the possession of 99.2% of allotted land has already been given to the beneficiaries/allottees and delivery of possession of approximately 222 hectares (22,26,257 sq.mts.) remained for various reasons as noted hereinbefore. 13. We, therefore, do not find any reason to keep the present petition pending. We dispose of the present petition, with the observations and directions that a positive endeavour shall be made for conclusion of the proceedings for allotment and handing over possession to the beneficiaries to whom the land has already been allotted, strictly in accordance with law. For any inaction on the part of the competent authority in compliance of this order, the eligible allottees/individual persons prejudiced by such inaction will have a right to bring their appropriate action before a competent court taking recourse to the legal remedy available to them. 14. For any other dispute being raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner herein in the present public interest litigation that beyond the area of approximately 222 hectares, still more area is left for allotment or the allottees and the beneficiaries have not been given possession thereof, it would be appropriate that the matter be left open for the individual allottees/beneficiaries to bring their own action. 15. It would not be possible for us to enter into the correctness of the description given before us in the affidavit of the Revenue department of the State, inasmuch, factual inquiry into individual claims cannot be made by this Court within the scope of the Public interest litigation in exercise of the power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In any case, all rights of the individual allottees/grantees are left open with the disposal of the present petition. In any case, all rights of the individual allottees/grantees are left open with the disposal of the present petition. All pending civil applications stand disposed of, accordingly.