Gujarat High Court
Vijuben Samatbhai Mori Wd/O Deceased ... vs State Of Gujarat on 27 November, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 6284 of 2017
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
VIJUBEN SAMATBHAI MORI WD/O DECEASED SAMATBHAI
HARAJDASBHAI
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HASIT H JOSHI(2480) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS SURBHI BHATI AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI
Date : 27/11/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. By way of filing present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:
(a) Admit this petition.
(b) Quash and set aside the impugned disputed entry
no. 1261 Annexure A as well as the order of the Collector, Devbhumi Dwarka dated 20.8.2014 rejecting the application of the petitioner for condonation of delay Annexure B to this petition and the order passed by the Page 1 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined Additional Secretary Revenue Department (Appeals) Ahmedabad dated 21.11.2016 Annexure C by declaring the same as illegal, improper, violative of the principles of natural justice and be further pleased to declare the petitioner as the grantee of the land in question being the sole heir of the deceased grantee.
(c) This Hon'ble Court be further pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for regrant of the land in question according to law since the petitioner is in possession of the land in question.
(d) Pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to restrain the respondent authorities from disturbing the existing position and possession of the petitioner over the land in question on the site and be further pleased to direct the respondent authorities to maintain status quo qua revenue record in respect of the land in question.
(e) Grant such other and further relief as deemed just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Hasit Joshi for the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Surbhi Bhati for the respondent-State.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi submits that on 30.09.1971 a land bearing Revenue Survey No.684 situated in village Dwarka admeasuring 3 Acres 26 Gunthas have been granted to Samatbhai Hardasbhai Mori by the Collector, Jamnagar, for "Sathani" purpose as the land is of new tenure and impartible land, and therefore, certain conditions were imposed at the Page 2 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined time of grating the said property to Samatbhai Hardasbhai Mori, and based upon which revenue entry was mutated in the revenue record, and since then the said property was lying in physical custody and possession of Samatbhai. In the year 1985, pursuant to breach of condition, revenue proceedings of breach of condition (Sharat Bhang) have been instituted by The Deputy Collector, and then after based upon the material available on record, the Deputy Collector has taken decision to forfeit the said land granted in favour of Samatbhai and passed order directing that the said land is required to be transferred in the name of Government. Pursuant to which a revenue entry (Sharat Bhang) was mutated in revenue record vide entry no. 1261 on 16.05.1985, and then after, on 24.08.1985, the said entry was subsequently certified by the Mamlatdar, Dwarka, as applicant herein being and a legal heir of said Samatbhai at all not aware about the initiation and outcome of those proceedings, as soon as, she had come to know about the factual aspects of the matter that a suo-moto revenue proceedings have been instituted by the Deputy Collector under the guise of non-fulfillment of the conditions imposed by the authority at the time of allotting/granting the said property to the husband of the petitioner on Sathani. It is the specific case of the petitioner before the Collector that entire proceedings have been instituted by the authority concerned by keeping the petitioner and/or her husband in dark. They were never intimated by the revenue authority that a suo-moto proceedings initiated by them, and therefore, the petitioners were at all not aware about the ongoing revenue proceedings before the revenue authority, and due to which they could not have got opportunity to contest the said proceedings. Even, Page 3 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined the outcome of the proceedings and order of the revenue authority had recently come to their notice, and therefore, immediately within no time, the revision proceedings have been instituted as there is more than 28 years of period have been elapsed, and therefore, a separate delay condonation application is preferred. Considering the above-stated totality of the facts of the matter, delay condonation application requires to be allowed and the entry mutated in the revenue record based upon the Sharat Bhang proceedings instituted by the Deputy Collector are required to be quashed and set aside by allowing the appeal and the said property/land is required to be mutated in the name of the legal heir of Samatbhai i.e. petitioner. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi further submits that a specific stand is being taken by the petitioner before concerned revenue authority that entire proceedings have been initiated by the authority concerned without issuing notice and informing to the petitioner concerned, in that event, those proceedings would certainly fall under the category of violation of principle of natural justice, and therefore, petition preferred by the applicant is required to be entertained. The said application had not been entertained by the Collector, therefore, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said decision, a revision application before the Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute) assailed the said order. The Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute) has also rejected the said revision application. Therefore, the present Special Civil Application is filed to quash and set aside both the orders passed by the Deputy Collector as well as the Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute).
4. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi further submits that, in fact, Page 4 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined during the pendency of the proceedings before the Collector, Panchkyas (Panchnama) had been carried out. If Hon'ble Court would make a cursory glance upon the contents of the said Panchkyas (Panchnama), in that event, it would have been found out that even on the date of preparation of Panchnama, the property was lying in the custody of the applicant and her relatives. He further submits that, in fact, husband of the applicant passed away in the year 1988, and when the revenue proceedings have been instituted by the Deputy Collector, at that relevant point of time, her husband was very much alive, and she was also knowing about the fact that her husband has not received any notice from the any competent revenue authority, and those particular facts have been stated by the applicant by way of filing affidavit before the competent authority. Despite the fact that all those particular facts have been placed on record by way of filing affidavit the authority has not entertained the same, and passed the order. Considering the above-stated totality of the facts of the matter, this is a fit case wherein appropriate opportunity of hearing is required to be provided to the petitioner, therefore, order passed by the concerned revenue authority in "Sharat Bhang" proceedings and then after confirmed in revision proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside and matter be remanded back to the Deputy Collector for the purpose of fresh initiation of proceedings.
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Surbhi Bhati appears on behalf of respondent-State has objected the present application with vehemence and submits that entire sequence of events of incidents available on record crystallized the position of fact that the Government land was granted to Page 5 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined the husband of the petitioner in the year 1971 as Sathani land as the said land is new tenure land and impartible land, therefore, certain conditions were imposed at the time of granting the said property. She further submits that if Hon'ble Court would make cursory glance upon the operative part of the order of the Collector as well as Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute), in that event, it would have been found out that based upon the breach of condition the suo-moto proceedings have been initiated by the Deputy Collector and despite the fact that order of the Deputy Collector, Collector and Special Secretary Revenue have been challenged by the applicant, the order of the Deputy Collector has also not been placed on record. The said fact itself speaks volume about the intention of the parties. So far as, observations and findings made by the Collector as well as Deputy Collector in the revenue proceedings crystallized the position of the fact that husband of the present petitioner passed away on 12.09.1988, and the proceedings have been concluded by the revenue authority in the year 1985. Therefore, admittedly, during the lifespan of the husband of the petitioner those proceedings have been instituted and concluded, and therefore, at the time of institution of the proceedings, notice is required to be issued to the husband, and at the time of preferring the revision application, husband was not available, and there is no document placed on record which would show and suggest that notice has not been served to the husband except the fact of denial of service of notice narrated in the affidavit. At the time of preferring the application, applicant has mentioned her age as 65 years, therefore, in the year 1990, she was major and she could Page 6 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined appear before authority concerned by way of filing appropriate proceedings. In fact, grantee was available at the time of initiation of proceedings, in that event, legal heirs of the grantee are not required to be joined and/or are to be heard. Entire proceedings are instituted by the authority concerned based upon the non-fulfillment (breach) of conditions imposed by the authority concerned at the time of issuance of grant, and those particular facts have been proved by the authority concerned, and ultimately order was passed. The said entry was mutated in the revenue record in the year 1985, and after lapse of more than 28 years, present application is filed with the lame excuses that notice issued by the revenue authority had not been served and they were kept in dark and without informing them entire proceedings have been initiated and all those proceedings have been carried out in an ex-parte manner, but in support of the same, not a single piece of document is placed on record. The documents available on record crystallized the position of fact that order is passed by the Deputy Collector in year 1985, entry was mutated in the revenue record in the same year and it is well within the knowledge of one and all that revenue entry mutated in the revenue record could be considered as "deeming fixing", and therefore, the said entry can be challenged within reasonable period of time. Learned AGP Ms. Bhati further submits that if Hon'ble Court would make cursory glance upon the order passed by the Collector, and subsequently, confirmed by the Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute), in that event, it would have been found out that a well-reasoned order with justification of all the factual aspects have been made by the competent revenue authorities. The said order is just, fair, Page 7 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined reasonable, legal and based upon the sound principle of law as well as the factual aspects of the matter is also discussed in a great detail and exhaustive manner. Learned AGP further submits that there is concurrent findings of the facts on the part of the revenue authorities, and generally in writ jurisdiction, more particularly, supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Hon'ble Court need not to have to interfere when the concurrent findings of the facts have been recorded by the revenue authorities. Considering the same, the order passed by the revenue authority is not required to be interfered with the hands of this Hon'ble Court at this juncture. Considering the same, petition is required to be dismissed.
6. Having heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and verifying the record and proceedings, it transpires from the the record that in the year 1971, more precisely, on 30.09.1971, as per the prevailing policy of the Government, a land admeasuring 3 Acre and 26 Gunthas had been granted in favour of one Samatbhai Hardasbhai Mori as the category of a land is new tenure and impartible in nature, therefore, at the time of granting the said land on Sathani certain prerequisite conditions were imposed, one of the conditions is that the said land is required to be used for agricultural purpose by cultivating the same, and if the grantee fails to carry out agricultural activities upon the said field, in that event, it would be termed as a breach of condition. Then after in the year 1985, particular facts have come into the notice of the revenue authority that there was breach of condition on the part of the petitioner as land was lying in an "idle condition". No agricultural activities have been carried out upon the said land.
Page 8 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined The condition of the land is a "barran" land, and therefore, a breach of condition (Sharat Bhang) proceedings have been instituted by the revenue authority. Notices have been issued to the party concerned, and after verifying record and proceedings, the authority concerned has come to the conclusion that the Government waste land which was granted/allotted to Samatbhai for the sole intent to carry out agricultural activities upon the said land is found in an idle condition, and since last many years nobody had cultivated the said land, therefore, necessary Panchkyas (Panchnama) as well as statements of the neighbours have recorded, and ultimately at the end of day, authority concerned has forfeited the said property in the name of Government by way of cancelling the said grant, and further ordered to transfer the said land as Government waste land. Pursuant to which on 16.05.1985, revenue entry vide entry no.1261 had been mutated in the revenue record on 16.05.1985, and then after, certified by the Talati, Dwarka. It is found out from the record that applicant herein is a wife of Samatbhai. The order of the Deputy collector has been challenged before the Collector and Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute) essentially by raising dispute that the revenue authorities concerned have not issued notice to Samatbhai before initiation of the proceedings and an ex-parte proceedings have been initiated by the revenue authority without bringing to the notice of the party concerned about the initiation of the proceedings, and therefore, those proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside, and matter is remanded back to the authority concerned and after giving full opportunity of hearing to both the parties, once again the issue involved in the matter is Page 9 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined required to be decided. It is contended by the learned advocate for the applicant that the property in dispute is situated within the territory of Dwarka Taluka and she used to cultivate the said land, and even on the date of filing the petition before this Hon'ble court and as on today, the custody of the said property is still lying with the applicant and she is still carrying out agricultural activities upon the said property. Therefore, considering the above-stated totality of the facts of the matter, application is required to be entertained. It is found out from the record that in the year 1971, land was granted in favour of the husband of the present applicant and as the husband of the applicant fails to abide by the terms and condition mentioned in the sanad (Sathani) in stricto sensu manner and failed to cultivate the said agricultural field authority concerned has initiated proceedings, and ultimately, arrived at the conclusion that since day one when property was handed over to Samatbhai he had not carried out any agricultural activities upon the said field, and therefore, passed order to forfeit the said land and directed to transfer the said property in the name of Government waste land after following due process of law. I have also gone through the findings and observations made by the revenue authority at the time of deciding the said application which crystallized the position of fact that the husband of the present petitioner i.e. Samatbhai passed away on 12.09.1988 whereas revenue authority has concluded the proceedings much before that, therefore, at the time of initiation of those proceedings, notice is required to be issued to Samatbhai. Herein this case on hand, applicant has come with a case that ex-parte proceedings initiated without serving notice to him and said act of the respondent would fall Page 10 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined under the category of violation of principle of natural justice, and therefore, petition requires to be entertained, but in support of the same, petitioner has not produced any documents that the authority concerned had without serving notice to Samatbhai, ex-parte conducted the proceedings. It is an admitted position of fact that those documents are lying with the custody of the Deputy Collector, therefore, when a person comes with a specific case that notice had not been issued and/or served to the original grantee i.e. Samatbhai and without serving notice, proceedings have been initiated by the revenue authority, in that event, duty is casted upon the head of person who used to raise grievances and making allegations against the other party by showing papers that notice issued by the authority concerned had not been duly served and/or notice itself had not been issued. I have verified the record and proceedings, nowhere along with the memo of petition, a single piece of document placed on record which would show and suggest that revenue proceedings have been initiated by the Deputy Collector without informing the applicant. It is found out from the record that the first proceedings have concluded by the Deputy Collector in the year 1985 and based upon which entry had already been mutated. The said order had been challenged by the present petitioner in the year 2012-2013 after lapse of so many years. The said delay appeal had been dismissed by the Collector in the year 2014. The said appeal was preferred after lapse of so many years and at the time of preferring the appeal essentially entire liability is tried to be thrown upon the head of the revenue authority that without providing appropriate opportunity of hearing straight away the said proceedings have been initiated behind the back Page 11 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined of the petitioner by keeping her in dark, and therefore, those proceedings are required to be quashed and set aside. The order of the Deputy Collector had been subsequently confirmed by the Collector and the Additional Secretary. All those three orders are challenged by way of preferring the present petition. As the copy of the first order passed by the Deputy Collector had not been placed on record a very pertinent query was asked by the court concerned that except the statement made by the applicant about the non-service of the notice to the applicant, any other material is not placed on record. It is the duty of the petitioner to place on record copy of the order of the Deputy Collector as well as papers of the proceedings carried out by the Deputy Collector at the time of initiation of proceedings and by verifying the same one can jump to the conclusion that whether those particular proceedings have been initiated without serving notice to the husband of the present applicant or not. Unless and until those documents are placed on record one cannot reach to the conclusion that those proceedings have instituted by the authority concerned without serving notice to Samatbhai i.e. husband of the applicant or not. When particular objection was raised by raising fingers towards the act, action and conduct of the revenue authority, in that event, it is the duty of the petitioner to place on record those set of documents to show and suggest that the documents available on record crystallized the position of fact that notice issued by the authority concerned has not been duly served. When this particular question was being asked to the learned advocate for the applicant he said that the so-called proceedings had been instituted in the year 1985, therefore, at this juncture, Page 12 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined practically, it is not feasible on the part of the applicant to collect and place on record, and therefore, in absence of those important documents and material merely on the basis of certain assertions are being made in the petition specifically stating that notice had not been served to her has no legs to stand, and solely on the basis of which those legitimate proceedings initiated by the authority concerned cannot be quashed and set aside. It is also an admitted position of fact that the husband of the present petitioner was alive at that relevant point of time and during his lifespan entire proceedings have been concluded by the revenue authority and he had never ever challenged those proceedings before any higher authority despite the fact that entry of the said transactions had already been mutated in the revenue record in the year 1985. I have also gone through the order passed by the Collector as well as Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute), and found that at the time of reaching to the conclusion, authority concerned has discussed all the points available on record in a threadbare manner and by assigning justifiable reasons, a detailed well-reasoned order has been passed by the authority concerned and then after confirmed by the Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute) in the revision proceedings. Further, it is admitted position of fact that there are concurrent findings of the facts based upon the material available on record by both the revenue authorities, and Courts are very slow in overturning the decisions wherein orders passed by the lower authority had been confirmed by higher authority, in short, order of concurrent findings of facts generally could not have been disturbed by this Hon'ble Court except in the case wherein Page 13 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/6284/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 27/11/2025 undefined gross mistake could be said to have been made by the court concerned at the time of delivering the judgment, in that eventuality, Court can interfere. I have verified the record and proceedings and found that the orders passed by the authority concerned are just, fair, reasonable, legal and in consonance with the statutory provision of law, and therefore, do not require to be interfered at the hands of this Hon'ble Court. Hence, considering the same, present petition is dismissed.
7. Learned advocate Mr. Joshi submits that applicant intends to challenge the said order by way of preferring appropriate legal proceedings before competent court, therefore, to enable her to challenge the same, 6 weeks' time may be granted in favour of the applicant and during that period the order passed by this Court be stayed. Learned AGP has raised strong objection about the extending stay in favour of the applicant.
8. I have verified the record and proceedings and found that since beginning order of status quo is maintained, and as per the Panchnama prepared by the revenue authority the possession of the property is still lying in the custody of the applicant, therefore, considering the above-stated factual aspects of the matter, with intent to enable her to challenge the said order, the effect of the order is stayed for further period of 6 weeks from today.
(DIVYESH A. JOSHI,J) AMIT ITALIAN Page 14 of 14 Uploaded by AMIT DAHYABHAI ITALIAN(HCW0112) on Tue Dec 09 2025 Downloaded on : Fri Dec 12 22:30:48 IST 2025