Gujarat High Court
Kantibhai Joitaram & 3 vs State Of Gujarat & 4 on 15 November, 2014
Author: R.M.Chhaya
Bench: R.M.Chhaya
C/SCA/14876/2011 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 14876 of 2011
===========================================================
KANTIBHAI JOITARAM & 3....Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 4....Respondent(s)
================================================================
Appearance:
MR SP MAJMUDAR, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR VIMAL A PUROHIT, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 4
MR BHARAT VYAS, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 3
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2 - 3 , 5
UNSERVED-REFUSED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 4.1 - 4.2
================================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
Date : 15/11/2014
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard Mr.Vimal Purohit, with Mr.Mrugesh Barot, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Bharat Vyas, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5. Though served, no one appears on behalf of respondent Nos.4.1 to 4.2.
2. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 05.08.2011 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application No.TEN.BA394 of 1996.
Page 1 of 5 C/SCA/14876/2011 ORDER3. Record indicates that the said revision application came to be filed by the State of Gujarat challenging the order dated 22.10.1992 passed by Deputy Collector, (Land Reforms) Ahmedabad, in Tenancy Appeal No.509 of 1992. The record further indicates that the land bearing Block No.473, admeasuring 1.12 Gunthas, situated at Village Ambali, Taluka Daskroi, District Ahmedabad. (Now within the city limits of Ahmedabad), originally belongs to the predecessors of respondent Nos.4.1 to 4.1. Record of the petition further indicates that Mamlatdar & ALT, Daskroi, registered a Tenancy Case No.1335/1975, which culminated into the order dated 25.06.1976, wherein the private respondents were declared as tenant of the land in question and, accordingly, the predecessors of respondent Nos.4.1 to 4.2 became the occupiers of the land with restriction under Section 43 of the Tenancy Act. Record further reveals that thereafter, in the year 1992 i.e. after about more than 17 years, respondent No.4 filed an appeal before Deputy Collector, (Land Reforms), Ahmedabad, which came to be registered as Appeal No.509 of 1992, which came to be allowed vide order dated 22.10.1992 and the same came to be challenged by the State of Gujarat by filing a Revision Application No.394 of 1996 before Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and after lapse of 3 years and 6 months.
Page 2 of 5 C/SCA/14876/2011 ORDERThe said application came to be allowed and the order passed therein by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal is impugned in this petition. However, the facts, which are necessary to be stated at this stage are that present petitioners purchased the land in question by registered SaleDeed dated 22.09.1994 i.e after the appeal came to be allowed by Deputy Collector.
4. It is pertinent to note that the SaleDeed came to be executed by Power of Attorney on behalf of the original owner, who happens to be brother of present petitioner namely Bhupendrabhai Joitaram Patel. It further reveals that the revenue entries came to be mutated in favour of present petitioners, which is indicative from the Village Form No.7/12 forming part of the record of this petition. (at AnnexureE to this petition).
5. It is further pertinent to note that Entry No.283 came to be mutated in Village Form No.6 on 14.06.1996, which came to be certified also on 19.07.1996. In support of this factual matrix, technically the petitioners were not made parties in the Tenancy Revision. Though it can be inferred that they had constructive knowledge of the same specially when the entry No.283 came to be mutated. However, the facts remain that the Page 3 of 5 C/SCA/14876/2011 ORDER petitioners had no opportunity to place their case before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, and therefore, on this sole ground, the impugned order dated 05.08.2011 deserves to be quashed and the matter is required to be remanded back to the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal for its rehearing on merits after joining the present petitioners as party respondents.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners have no objection if the petitioners are ordered to be joined as party respondents in the revision, which is remanded and restored to its original file before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal as per this order and hence, the following order is passed: (1) Impugned order dated 05.08.2011 passed by Secretary, Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, is quashed as the same is passed without joining the present petitioners, who had become owners of the land in question even before revision was allowed.
(2) The impugned order dated 05.08.2011 is quashed solely on the aforesaid ground and therefore, it would be open for all the parties i.e State Government, original owners as well as newly added parties i.e. present petitioners to raise all contentions available before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal.
Page 4 of 5 C/SCA/14876/2011 ORDER(3) The Gujarat Revenue Tribunal shall decide the revision of the State Government afresh without being influenced in any manner by the impugned order as well as any observations made in this order strictly in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 30th May, 2015. Learned counsel for the parties assures this Court that the parties shall cooperate with the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal during the course of hearing. It is, however, clarified that this Court has not examined the matter on merits of the revision and therefore, disposal of this petition shall not prejudice the rights of the State Government in any manner.
With these observations and directions, the present petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs. Direct Service is permitted.
(R.M.CHHAYA, J.) Suchit Page 5 of 5