Gujarat High Court
Shri Khodaldham Traders vs State Of Gujarat on 23 March, 2023
Author: Bhargav D. Karia
Bench: Bhargav D. Karia
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3635 of 2023
==========================================================
SHRI KHODALDHAM TRADERS
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. BHAUMIK DHOLARIYA(7009) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR KRUTIK PARIKH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA
Date : 23/03/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr.Bhaumik Dholariya for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Krutik Parikh for the respondent-State who appears on advance copy.
2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the notices dated 8th February, 2023 issued by the respondent No.2-City Mamlatdar, Asarwa Page 1 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined purportedly under Section 202 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 (for short 'the Code').
3. The brief facts of the case are as under :
3.1. The petitioner is a proprietorship firm and is in the business of retail trading of building materials in the name and style of Shri Khodiyar Traders.
3.2. It is the case of the petitioner that Survey No. 826/1 of Moje: Naroda, Taluka:
Asarwa, District: Ahmedabad originally was 10 Acre 34 Gunthas of land. One Munir Abdul Hussein Jivabhai purchased half of the land admeasuring 5 Acre 17 Gunthas from Survey No. 826/1 by registered sale-deed dated 18.02.1941. It is the case of the petitioner that Entry No.2493 came to be mutated Page 2 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined recording the said transaction on 09.03.1941.
As there was mistake in mentioning name of Abdul Hussein, Entry No.4726 came to be mutated correcting name as Munir Abdulhusen Jivabhai in the land bearing Survey No.826/1 and other lands. Munir Abdul Hussein passed away on 16.04.1968 and on his death, heirship Entry NO.7390 came to be mutated on 23.08.1971 mutating the names of heirs of Munir Abdul Hussein.
3.3. It is the case of the petitioner that Jibaben Nathaji, the daughter of Detarji was tenant of the rest of the land admeasuring 5 Acre 17 Gunthas and her name came to be mutated pursuant to the Entry No.8763. Jibaben Nathaji passed away on 29.03.1998 and upon her death, heirship Entry No.10133 came to be mutated entering her heirs Aataji Bhalaji and Page 3 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined Pashaben Bhalaji.
3.4. It is the case of the petitioner that the proceedings under the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short 'the Tenancy Act') were initiated and part of Survey No.826/1 to the extent of 5 Acre 17 Gunthas was found to be in breach of provisions of the Act, 1948 and therefore was ordered to be entered in the name of the Government.
3.5. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has come across such proceedings whereby the Mamlatdar and ALT City in Ganot Case No.31 of 1989 vide order dated 01.04.1991 held Karsanji Thakarshi Sukhadiya as the tenant and also fixed the price in his favor and granted the same land to him by Page 4 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined fixing the price with restricted tenure land. The petitioner further came to know that the heirs of deceased Nasim Munir challenged the said order dated 01.04.1991 passed by the Mamlatdar and ALT City in Ganot Case No. 31 of 1989 by preferring Tenancy Appeal No.29 of 2003 before the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms and Appeal), Ahmedabad.
3.6. The Deputy Collector (Land Reforms and Appeal), Ahmedabad vide order dated 27.07.2004 set aside the said order dated 01.04.1991 and the said proceeding was not carried further and attained finality.
3.7. It is the case of the petitioner that Mansukhbhai Dahyabhai Radadiya appraised the petitioner that the heirs of the original owner viz. heirs of deceased Bashir Munir Page 5 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined Ahemadi, heirs of deceased Zahir Munir Ahemadi, Farzaben Munirbhai and heirs of Nasim Munir Ahemadi transferred 21701 square meters (25954 square yards) of the land bearing Survey No. 826/1 paiki in favor of Mansukhbhai Dahyabhai Radadiya in October, 2004 and the petitioner was informed that a Development Agreement dated 16.10.2004 was also executed by the aforesaid heirs of the original owner in favor of Mansukhbhai Dahyabhal Radadiya. 3.8. The petitioner purchased a portion of land admeasuring 1264 square yards situated on northern side adjacent to Kharicut Canal Road from Survey No. 826/1/1 of Moje: Naroda, Taluka: Asarwa, District: Ahmedabad from Mansukhbhai Dahyabhai Radadiya through Sale Agreement dated 15/18.12.2018 by paying consideration of Rs.88,48,000/-. In addition Page 6 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined to the sale-agreement, the seller Mansukhbhai also executed Possession Agreement dated 15/18.12.2018 and General Power of Attorney dated 15/18.12.2018 in favor of the petitioner. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has two electricity connections on the subject land in the name of the Proprietor of the firm and the petitioner is also paying the property tax levied by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. 3.9. It is the case of the petitioner that two sheds were already in existence on the subject land since last fifteen to twenty years, even before the petitioner purchased the land in question and one Office covered by shed of around 10 feet X 10 feet is situated on the premises which was already rented by Mansukhbhai Radadiya to Ramdev Mandap Page 7 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined Decoration before the petitioner purchased the land and the petitioner has continued such tenant. It is the case of the petitioner that one outhouse consisting four small rooms with one toilet and bathroom for laborers is also situated on the said land and a cellular tower of Jio Company is already there in the subject land since 2018. A Kachcha Storage room which was being used for storing cement was there on the land but the same has been demolished. 3.10. The respondent No.2 vide notice dated 05.11.2022, informed the petitioner that the petitioner has made unauthorized construction on the land of the Government bearing Survey No.826/1/1 and thereby directed to remove the same within 7 days otherwise, actions will be taken. The petitioner replied to the said notice vide reply dated 11.11.2022 with a copy Page 8 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined to the Revenue Talati, Naroda, sent through registered post with A.D. on 19.11.2022. 3.11. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner, thereafter, on 21.12.2022 made further representation to the respondent No.2 and the Chief Minister, which was dispatched through courier on 22.12.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that without dealing with the reply of the petitioner dated 11.11.2022 and representation cum reply dated 21.12.2022, the respondent No.2 issued another notice dated 23.12.2022 to the petitioner stating that the petitioner has made unauthorized construction on the land of the Government bearing Survey No.826/1/1 and despite issuance of previous notice dated 05.11.2022, the petitioner has not removed the construction. Thereafter fourth notice dated 08.02.2023 was Page 9 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined issued to the petitioner stating that the petitioner has made unauthorized construction on the land of the Government bearing Survey No. 826/1/1 and despite the previous letters dated 05.11.2022, 23.12.2022 and 06.01.2023, the petitioner has not removed the construction and thereby directed to remove the same within one day otherwise, the action will be taken from the office of the respondent No.2 to remove the unauthorized construction.
3.12. The petitioner filed detailed reply dated 10.02.2023 to the notice issued by the respondent No.2 dated 08.02.2023. It is the case of the petitioner that without considering or dealing with the said reply and previous reply as well as representation of the petitioner, straightaway on 13.02.2023, Page 10 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined the respondent No.2 through his subordinates and other staff, came to the land of the petitioner and started demolition and thereby, demolished a Kachcha Storage room which was being used for storing cement. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent No.2 had also taken an undertaking of the petitioner under duress and coercion and before three- four days thereof, the petitioner was also threatened that the petitioner will be forcefully evicted from the subject land. 4.1. Learned advocate Mr.Bhaumik Dholariya for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.2 has not followed the procedure prescribed under Section 61 or Section 79A of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 (for short 'the Code') and straight away issued the notice for eviction without mentioning any Page 11 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined provisions of the Code and therefore, the impugned notices are bad in law and liable to be quashed and set aside.
4.2. It was submitted that the petitioner is in possession of the land in question since 2018 and occupying the said land from Mansukhbhai Radadiya pursuant to the Development Agreement dated 16.10.2004 executed by the legal heirs of the original owners in respect of the land in question and agreement of sale dated 15/18.12.2018, possession agreement in favour of Late father of the petitioner.
4.3. In support of his submissions, reliance was placed on the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in case of Government of Gujarat Versus Amraji Motiji Thakor reported in 1991 (2) GLH 606 rendered Page 12 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined in First Appeal No.148 of 1968 and Special Civil Application No.1099 of 1976 to submit that the notice under Section 202 of the Code does not in itself amount to a decision or an order of eviction of a person wrongfully in possession of the land but, it is only a mode of an enforcement of such decision or order recorded under the substantive provisions of the Code or any other Act for the time being in force conferring powers on the Collector to evict such person.
4.4. It was therefore submitted that in absence of any proceedings under Section 61 or Section 79A of the Code or under any other provisions of any other law, the respondent No.2 could not have issued the impugned notice under Section 202 of the Code to evict the petitioner from the land in question as the Page 13 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined petitioner has never been declared as encroacher by any order by any authority under the law.
5.1. On the other hand, learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Krutik Parikh for the respondent No.1 submitted that admittedly, the land in question situated at Survey No.826/1/1 is a Government land and the petitioner is occupying the Government land and for that, there is no need for issuance of any order declaring the petitioner as encroacher as it is an admitted fact that the petitioner is in possession and in occupation of the land of Survey No.826/1/1 5.2. It was submitted by learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Parikh that the petitioner has failed to establish its right, Page 14 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined title or interest on the Government land nor any valid document is made available on the record to show even a prima-facie case and therefore, the case of the petitioner would not fall within the purview of the provisions of Sections 61 and 79A of the Code. 5.3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that for removal of the encroachment on the Government land in State of Gujarat, several instructions by way of Circulars are issued.
5.4. It was submitted by learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Parikh that the Circle Officer, Mamlatdars and the Revenue Officers, as the case may be, are the responsible Officers who have to make sure that the smooth implementation of the instructions issued by Page 15 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined the State Government, more particularly, to see to it that effective steps to stop such enroachment or to remove such encroachment on the Government land are taken at the earliest. 5.5. It was pointed out that the concerned Officer is maintaining the Encroachment Register in the case where Section 61 of the Land Revenue Code proceedings is required to be followed. However, in the facts of the case, admittedly, the land in question is a Government land which is occupied by the petitioner since 2018 and in spite of issuing various notices since 2022, the petitioner has not vacated the land in question. 5.6. It was submitted that the land in question is vested in Government land after following the procedure of the Tenancy Act and Page 16 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined therefore, in such cases, provisions of Section 61 or Section 79A of the Code would not be applicable.
5.7. It was pointed out that in the year 2018, a complaint was received from the nearby Society that there is an unauthorized encroachment on survey No.826/1/1 and accordingly, it was found that the petitioner is occupying the land of survey No.826/1/1 which admittedly a Government land and therefore, the impugned notices are issued to the petitioner to vacate the land in question. 5.8. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submitted that in view of the fact that the land in question is a Government land, the respondent No.2 is justified in issuing the notices and the petitioners are entitled to Page 17 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined give reply to such notices justifying their occupation as the impugned notices are issued calling upon the petitioner to make submissions and to vacate the premises of the land in question as the same is a Government land.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties, it appears that it is not in dispute that the survey No.826/1/1 of Village:Naroda, Taluka:Asarwa, District:Ahmedabad is a Government land as held in the Tenancy proceedings which has achieved finality in the year 2004 and therefore, no interference is called for while exercising extra-ordinary jurisdiction for interfering in the process of evicting the Government land by the respondent No.2.
7. The provisions of Sections 61 and 79A of Page 18 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined the Code provide as under :
"61. Penalties for unauthorized occupation of land :- Any person who shall unauthorizedly enter upon occupation of any land set apart for any special purpose, or any unoccupied land which has not been alienated, and any person who uses or occupies any such land to the use or occupation of which by reason of any of the provisions of this Act he is not entitled or has ceased to be entitled shall,] if the land which he unauthorizedly occupies forms part of an assessed survey number, pay the assessment of the entire number for the whole period of his [unauthorized] occupation, and if the land so occupied by him has not been assessed, such amount of assessment as would be leviable for the said period in the same village on the same extent of similar land [used for] the same purpose; and shall also be liable, at the discretion of the Collector, to a fine not exceeding [one per cent of the prevalent annual statement of rate (Jantri) as may be notified by the state Government from time to time] if he has taken up the land for purposes of cultivation, and not exceeding such limit as may be fixed in rules made in this behalf under section 214, if he has [used it for] any non-agricultural purpose.Page 19 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined The Collector's decision as to the amount of assessment payable for the land unauthorizedly occupied shall be conclusive, and in determining its amount occupation for [a portion] of year shall be counted as for a whole year.
The person unauthorizedly occupying any such land may be summarily evicted by the collector, and any crop raised in the land shall be liable to forfeiture, and any building, or other construction, erected thereon shall also, if not removed by him after such written notice as the Collector may deem reasonable, be liable to forefeiture, [or to summary removal]. Forfeitures under this section shall be adjudged by the Collector, and any property so forfeited shall be disposed of as the Collector may direct [and the cost of the removal of any encroachment under this section shall be recoverable as an arrear of land revenue].
79A. Any person unauthorizedly occupying, or wrongfully in possession of, any land-- [(a) to the use or occupation of which by reason of any of the provisions of this Act he is not entitled or has ceased to be entitled, or]
(b) [which] is not transferable without previous sanction under 4 [section 73A or section 73AA or section 73AB] by Page 20 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined virtue of any condition lawfully [annexed to the tenure] under the provisions of section 62, 67 or 68, may be summarily evicted by the Collector] :
[Provided that this section shall not apply in the case where the tribal transferor does not make an application under clause (a) of sub section (3) of section 73 AA within the time specified in that clause for restoration of possession.]"
8. Section 61 provides for penalties for unauthorized occupation of land whereas, Section 79A provides for summary eviction of person unauthorizedly occupying a land. Both the provisions of the Code would be applicable when it is not in dispute that the person who is occupying the land is not a Government land.
9. The facts of the case are different than the the facts which were present before the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Page 21 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined Government of Gujarat versus Amraji Motiji Thjakor rendered in First Appeal No.148 of 1968, wherein, the First Appeal arose from a decree passed in Civil Suit No.832 of 1964 for a declaration that the notice issued by the Deputy Collector for taking away the possession of the land in dispute was illegal and for the injunction restraining the defendant and its servants from disturbing the possession of the Suit land of Survey No.240. In the said case, the land was described as a Chakariyu in the Revenue Records and the case of the plaintiff in the said case was that this land originally belongs to their forefathers and its land revenue was alienated in favour of their forefathers in lieu of services as village servants useful to the Government to be rendered. Whereas, in the facts of the case, admittedly the land in Page 22 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined question is a Government land and therefore, neither the provisions of Section 61 or 79A would be applicable.
10. In view of such facts, the observations made by the Full Bench in the said case are relevant to be considered which read as under:
"11. It is true that Sec. 202 of the Code is not necessarily confined to the case of persons dealt with under Secs. 61 and 79A only. Therefore, we must try to find out whether there is anything in Sec. 202 which, notwithstanding the aforesaid discussion based on the provisions of Secs. 61 and 79A of the Code and Sec. 9 of the Revenue Tribunal Act, may lead us to the conclusion that the notice issued under Sec. 202 itself amounts to a decision or order. The opening portion of the section refers in terms to the power of the Collector to evict a person wrongfully in possession of the land either under the provisions of the Code or in any other Act for the time being in force. That power, we have already seen, lies outside the provisions of Sec. 202. It is with regard to the eviction of person whose eviction has been decided upon in Page 23 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined exercise of the aforesaid power that the section makes provision. The section provides for the manner of enforcement of a decision or order of eviction taken in exercise of powers to be found in the Code or in any other law of the time being in force. It is a sort of a provisions similar to execution of a decree of a Civil Court. The mode of enforcing the decision or order is a notice requiring the person ordered to be evicted to vacate the land within such time as may appear to the Collector to be reasonable. The need for such notice and giving of reasonable time seems to have been included because the eviction Is to take place from land which in many cases may have been put to agricultural use. There is nothing in Sec. 202 to indicate that the Legislature intended this notice to be a decision or order of eviction. The notice to evict wth n reasonable time ordinarily is not the expression used by the Legislature to denote a decision or order of eviction. The provision in the said section as to removal of resistance or obstruction after a summary enquiry aso indicates that the section pertains to the domain of execution or enforcement of a decision or order already taken or made in exercise of power conferred by some substantive provision of the Code or any other Act for the time being in force. The original note to the section reads 'Collector how to proceed in order to evict any person wrongfully in Page 24 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined possession of land." This note also shows the drift of the section m the direction of enforcement or execution of decision or order of eviction.
12. In Chimanlal's case (supra), the Bombay High Court had to deal with the contention based on Sec. 14 of the Bombay Revenue Jurisdiction Act, 1876. The said provision debarred a Civil Court from enterta ning any suit against the Government on account of any act or omission of any revenue officer unless the plaintiff had first presented all such appeals allowed by law for the time being in force within a period of limitation for institution of the suit. The question arose whether prior to bringing such a suit by the pla 'ntiff in that case an appeal against the notice in respect of the suit land given under Sec. 202 of the Code should have been presented. Divetia, J. speaking for the Bench said at page 165 as under :
[It is clear to my mind that the Government can pass an order for eviction of a person who is wrongfully in possession of land by giving him the notice as prescribed in this section. That notice in fact amounts to a decision or order of the Government to evict the person who is in such wrongful possession. There is no provision in the Land Revenue Code that before the notice under Sec. 202 is given, the Government should actually pass an order and communicate that order to the party concerned before giving him notice. It Page 25 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined is open to the Government to pass an order in the form of a notice, and as provided by the section to serve it on the party concerned, and if that is done, the Government must be deemed to have complied with the provisions of the Land Revenue Code."]
13. The learned Judge did recognise that the Government has power to summarily evict under Secs. 61, 66 and 79A of the Code the only reason on which the conclusion mentioned in the aforesaid observations was reached was that there was no provision in the Code showing that before issuing notice under Sec. 202, the Government should actually pass an order and communicate it to the person concerned. With great respect it is not possible to agree with this reason. In our opinion, Sec. 202 of the Code does not operate in the field of taking a decision or making an order of eviction, but it operates in the field of enforcement of that decision or order. The section contemplates actual eviction if the notice is not obeyed by removing any person who may refuse to vacate the land. Not only that, if any resistance or obstruction is offered, the section also contemplates summary enquiry by the Collector in the facts of the case. If the Collector is satisfied that the resistance or obstruction was without any just cause and such resistance or obstruction still continues, the same can, inter alia, be removed by issuing a warrant for the arrest of the person causing resistance Page 26 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined or obstruction and his commitment to close custody as provided in the section. All these elements would clearly show that Section 202 operates in the field of enforcement of a decision or order as to eviction passed under the substantive provisions contained in the Code or any other Act for the time being in force, conferring power on the Collector to evict a person wrongfully in possession of land.
18. Our answer to the question re-framed is as under:
[(1) Anotice under Sec. 202 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code does not in itself account to a decision or order of eviction of a person wrong fully in possession of land; but is only a mode of enforcement of such decision or order recorded under the substantive provisions of the Code or any other Act for the time being in force conferring power on the Collector to evict such person.] [(2) In view of the above conclusion, the question of application of principles of natural justice at the stage of issuing notice under Sec. 202 does not arise. It is made clear, however, that the principles of natural justice would be applicable at the stage of recording the decision or order to evict in case of exercise of power by the Collector under Sec. 61 or 79A of the Code which are some of the substantive provisions in the Code Page 27 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined conferring such power on the Collector.] [(3) The summary enquiry contemplated by the latter part of Sec. 202 is not meant for reaching or recording a decision or order of eviction. It applies to the contingency of resistance or obstruction in taking possession of land, in the course of enforcement of a decision or order to evict made undet some provision of the code such as Sec. 61 or 79 A or any other Act for the time being in force empowering the Collector to evict a person wrongfully in possession of land.]"
11. The above findings of the Full Bench in the case of Amraji Motiji Thjakor (Supra), on the contrary would go against the petitioner as it is not in dispute that the petitioner is occupying Government land and admittedly an unregistered agreement for sale in respect of a Government land situated at Survey No.826/1/1 was executed in 2018 and therefore, no interference is required to be made in the impugned notices.
Page 28 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023
NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/3635/2023 ORDER DATED: 23/03/2023 undefined
12. The petition therefore being devoid of any merit is accordingly dismissed.
(BHARGAV D. KARIA, J) PALAK Page 29 of 29 Downloaded on : Sun Sep 17 22:56:19 IST 2023