Gujarat High Court
Dharmendra Pramukhbhai Patel vs Collector, Ahmedabad on 6 February, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 GUJ 236
Author: A. S. Supehia
Bench: A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/16343/2017 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16343 of 2017
With
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 19894 of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Sd/-
================================================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to
see the judgment ? NO
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
NO
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
judgment ? NO
4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law
as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any
NO
order made thereunder ?
================================================================
DHARMENDRA PRAMUKHBHAI PATEL
Versus
COLLECTOR, AHMEDABAD & 1 other(s)
================================================================
Appearance in Special Civil Application No:16343 of 2017
MR S N SOPARKAR, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MR NIKUNT K
RAVAL(5558) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
DS AFF.NOT FILED (N)(11) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR ADITYASINH JADEJA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 2
================================================================
Appearance in Special Civil Application No:19894 of 2017
MR R S SANJANWALA, SENIOR COUNSEL WITH MR SALIL M THAKORE
for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ADITYASINH JADEJA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 06/02/2020
COMMON ORAL JUDGMENT
1. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, the matters are taken up for final hearing. Page 1 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 07:11:58 IST 2020
C/SCA/16343/2017 JUDGMENT
2. Since the issue raised in the present petitions is common, the same is decided by this common judgment.
3. Rule. Learned AGP waives service of rule for the respondent no.1- State.
4. The present petitions have been filed against the order dated 21.07.2017 passed by the respondent no.2 with regard to the revival of the N.A. Permission granted for the part of the land bearing survey no.230/2/1/2 of Mouje Vadaj, Taluka City (West) of Ahmedabad district.
5. The brief facts are narrated hereinbelow from Special Civil Application No.16343 of 2017.
5.1. The petitioner is the owner and in possession of land bearing Survey no.230/2/1/2 of Mouje Vadaj, Taluka City (West) of Ahmedabad district. The total area of the land admeasuring 88,657 sq.mtrs. The said property was purchased by the petitioner on 03.08.2011 by a registered sale deed and to that effect revenue entry was mutated. 5.2. Previously the petitioner had also inherited part of the land and by way of settlement/partition in disputes between the family members, for which Civil Suit No.312 of 1984 had been instituted and Entry no.15520 was mutated, by which name of the petitioner, being the descendant of Page 2 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 07:11:58 IST 2020 C/SCA/16343/2017 JUDGMENT deceased Pramukhlal Parshottamdas Patel, was shown as holding 1063.60 sq.mtrs. of the land in question.
5.3. The petitioner was desirous of selling part of the property and had accordingly applied for conversion of the land for use of non-agricultural. He applied for conversion of 7,841 sq.mtrs of land for N.A. residential purpose and 815.50 sq.mtrs. of land for commercial use. Such property was permitted to be converted to non-agricultural use vide order dated 15.03.2014.
5.4. Subsequently, such land was sold out for construction of apartment complex and commercial construction respectively and on the portion of land where N.A. permission was sought for residential purpose, an apartment scheme was constructed and approximately 250 flats have already been sold post grant of appropriate rajachitthi and building usage permission.
5.5. Thereafter, a notice was issued by respondent no.2 on 29.09.2016 initiating suo motu revision proceedings seeking cancellation of the non- agricultural use permission granted in the year 2014.
6. Learned Senior Counsel Mr.S.N.Soparkar appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the proceedings are initiated for the entries, which were made in the year 1933 and in the year 1934 respectively, whereby the order was passed to convert the said land into old tenure Page 3 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 07:11:58 IST 2020 C/SCA/16343/2017 JUDGMENT from new tenure and accordingly, entry was mutated on 23.03.1934 showing the land as old tenure based on Entry no.966. Thus, he has submitted that after passage of almost 84 years, the respondent authorities have initiated suo motu revision proceedings, hence such proceedings are required to be quashed.
7. Per contra, learned AGP Mr.Adityasinh Jadeja has submitted that the impugned orders do not require any interference since it was found by the respondent authorities that the initial entry, which was mutated, itself was premised on an incorrect permission of NA, and since the status of the land was found to be disputed, the revenue authorities have initiated such proceedings.
8. The facts, as narrated hereinabove, suggest that the respondent authorities have initiated the proceedings after passage of 84 years disputing the status of the land being converted from new tenure old to tenure. Pursuant to the powers exercised by way of suo motu revision, the show cause notice dated 29.09.2016 is issued by the respondent no.2 with regard to the NA permission granted in the year 2014 by exercising powers under section 211 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879. The proceedings are initiated on the entries which are recorded in the year 1933-34, whereby an order was passed to convert the land from new tenure to old tenure on payment of 10 times premium. Accordingly, the Page 4 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 07:11:58 IST 2020 C/SCA/16343/2017 JUDGMENT entries were registered on 23.03.1934 as old tenure land. Subsequently, there are various transactions of the said land. The petitioner had sold the land to one Savvy Infrastructure for the land after obtaining the NA permission which has been recorded as Entry no.23574 on 18.05.2014. Subsequently, the apartment blocks have been constructed on the land in question and the sale of such apartments has been made. The respondent authorities since the year 1934 have not questioned the status of the land being old tenure land, and the same is being doubted after the passage of 84 years.
9. By now it is well settled proposition of law, that wherein the no limitation is provided under the statute for exercising the suo motu powers, the same has to be exercised within a reasonable period of three years. Thus, by such belated exercise of powers, the respondent authorities cannot be allowed to resurrect the things which have been settled. The order dated 21.07.2017 passed by the respondent no.2 and any further proceedings, if any, undertaken pursuant to the order are hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute.
10. Registry to place a copy of this order in each of the connected matter.
Sd/-
(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) ABHISHEK Page 5 of 5 Downloaded on : Sun Jun 14 07:11:58 IST 2020