Gujarat High Court
Vinubhai Maganbhai Kalawadia vs Collector on 12 February, 2020
Author: A. S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/8694/2017 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8694 of 2017
==========================================================
VINUBHAI MAGANBHAI KALAWADIA
Versus
COLLECTOR & 6 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NIKHIL S KARIEL(2315) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR DHAWAN JAYSWAL, AGP (99) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
HCLS COMMITTEE(4998) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
MR SAURABH M PATEL(5019) for the Respondent(s) No. 2
NOTICE SERVED BY DS(5) for the Respondent(s) No. 1,3,4,5,6,7
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 12/02/2020
ORAL ORDER
1. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. Issue Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Jayswal waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent No.1. Learned advocates appearing for the respective private respondents waives service of notice of Rule.
3. The short issue, which needs deliberation in the present writ petition, is whether the impugned order dated 14.03.2017 is required to be set aside for the reason that the petitioner and subsequent purchasers were not heard before passing the order.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the land bearing Block No.1670 admeasuring 14568 sq. mts. situated at Mouje: Degam, Taluka: Chikhli, District: Navsari was belonging to one Narsinhbhai Patel. On 04.02.2008, the respondent Nos.3 to 7 had purchased the land in question from its original owner, i.e., Narsinhbhai Patel by way of a registered sale deed vide Registration No.163 of 2008. Entry No.10751 came to be mutated into the revenue record on 11.04.2008 and the said entry came to be certified on 14.07.2008. 4.1 Thereafter, on 27.12.2010, the respondent Nos.5 to 7 had executed a release deed qua the land in question in favour of the Page 1 of 3 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 16:29:42 IST 2020 C/SCA/8694/2017 ORDER respondent Nos.3 and 4 and thus, the respondent Nos.3 and 4 became the owners and occupiers of the land in question in view of the release deed dated 27.12.2010.
4.2 Subsequently, the petitioner had purchased the land in question from the respondent Nos.3 and 4 vide a registered sale deed dated 12.09.2014 bearing Registration No.1568 of 2014. The petitioner had verified the necessary revenue records qua the land in question before purchasing the said land. Entry No.11766 came to be mutated in the revenue record on 12.09.2014 and the said entry came to be certified on 10.11.2014.
4.3 Thereafter, on 15.04.2015, the petitioner, being the legal owner and occupier of the land in question, had applied for N.A. permission and subsequently, vide order dated 13.10.2015, the District Development Officer, Navsari had granted N.A. permission qua the land in question. On 24.02.2016, the respondent No.2 had made a complaint to the Collector, Navsari and thereby raised objection qua the mutation of the aforesaid Entry No.10751 dated 11.04.2008, i.e., after gross and unexplained delay of 8 years from the date of mutation and certification of the said entry. It was mentioned in the complaint dated 24.02.2016 that the respondent No.2 is the heir of late Narsinhbhai Chamariya and the respondent Nos.3 to 7 had purchased the land in question which was restricted tenure land under Section 73AA of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 ("the Code") Act by way of bogus sale deed. It was also contended that the said sale transaction was in breach of the provision of Section 73AA of the Code and, therefore, the Entry No.10751 mutated in that regard is required to be quashed. Thereafter, upon receipt of the complaint made by the respondent No.2, the respondent No.1 had issued a show-cause notice dated 03.06.2016 to the earlier purchasers of the land in question and RTS Review Case No.11 of 2016 came to be registered. The respondent Page 2 of 3 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 16:29:42 IST 2020 C/SCA/8694/2017 ORDER Nos.3 to 6 had appeared in the said proceedings and contested the case by raising the preliminary objection with regard to the delay in initiating the review proceedings.
5. It is a case of the petitioner that he was not joined as a party in the proceedings of RTS Review Case No.11 of 2016 and the impugned order has been passed without hearing him.
6. By the impugned order dated 14.03.2017, the respondent No.1 herein has quashed and set aside the Entry No.10751 dated 11.04.2008 mutated in favour of the respondent Nos.3 to 7 on the ground that the land in question is restricted tenure land under Section 73AA of the Code and the said land was transferred to non- adivasi without prior permission of the competent authority. The Deputy Collector is also directed to initiate appropriate proceedings for breach of the provisions of Section 73AA of the Code.
7. Learned advocate appearing for the respective parties are ad idem that the petitioner was not a party to the proceedings of RTS Review Case No.11 of 2016, wherein the order has been passed affecting the rights of the petitioner.
8. In this view of the matter, the impugned order is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the Deputy Collector, Navsari to pass a fresh order after hearing all the necessary parties, including the present petitioner. Appropriate order shall be passed, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. Till the final order is passed, the respondents are directed to maintain status-quo with regard to the land in question. Rule made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) GUPTA* Page 3 of 3 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 16:29:42 IST 2020