Gujarat High Court
Kesarben Jitubhai Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 21 July, 2022
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar, Ashutosh J. Shastri
C/WPPIL/31/2018 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 31 of 2018
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR FIXING DATE OF HEARING) NO. 1 of 2022
In
R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) NO. 31 of 2018
==========================================================
KESARBEN JITUBHAI PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 35 other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR.DIPEN F CHAUDHARI(6740) for the Applicant(s) No. 1
MR KM ANTANI, AGPfor the Opponent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
MR ANKIT Y BACHANI(5424) for the Opponent(s) No. 7,8
MR RB THAKOR(6743) for the Opponent(s) No. 6
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE
ARAVIND KUMAR
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI
Date : 21/07/2022
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. JUSTICE ARAVIND KUMAR)
1. Petitioner who claims to be a social worker and agriculturist is claiming to espouse public cause through this petition inter alia contending that revenue survey No.437 spread over in area of 638.33 acres had been declared as gaucher land in the year 1950 and accordingly, revenue entries were mutated and over passage of time, different applications were received in respect of said survey number for allotment for different purposes and while considering such applications, Collector had allotted 12 Gunthas of land to 43 different persons in the same survey Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 25 21:27:49 IST 2022 C/WPPIL/31/2018 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2022 number which was also entered in the revenue records, entry No.843, and classified as Vadi (Garden).
2. It is contended by the petitioner that due to passage of time, population of the village increased and for allotment of lands, applications were received by the Gram Panchayat and different pieces of land were allotted to villagers. It is further stated that 200 persons are residing in the village and they applied for conversion of gaucher land/ gamtal land to the Gram Panchayat, which has been forwarded to the concerned authority and as such, the Collector on 11.1.2010 had allotted 2 acres of land to the Gram Panchayat. Contending inter alia that private respondents who were allotted plots had sold the land at premium rate by executing the sale deeds, by showing the land as adjacent to National Highway by creating forged and fabricated documents in collusion with the revenue authorities. As such, the petitioner is seeking the following relief:-
12(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue necessary directions upon the respondent authorities to take appropriate action/fair inquiry against the private respondents pertaining to revenue survey no. 437 (which is Gauchar Land) situated at village Chandisar Ta. Palanpur Dist. Banaskantha, wherein the after the re-survey by private agency along with District Inspector Land Record the revenue survey no. 437 paiki 2,3,6,10 and 13 (new survey no 32,33) which is originally situated in the interior side of the National Highway but after the re-survey the said revenue survey no 437 paiki 2,3,6,10 and 13 (new survey no 32,33)is showed to be adjacent to the Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 25 21:27:49 IST 2022 C/WPPIL/31/2018 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2022 National Highway and the said land is sold to the private respondents herein at the premium rate by the brokers in collusion with Government agencies.
3. We have heard arguments of Shri Dipen Chaudhary, learned counsel appearing for petitioner and Shri K.M. Antani, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the State. Perused the papers.
4. At the outset, it requires to be noticed that though present petition is styled as 'Public Interest Litigation', in effect, it is not so. It can be either construed as 'Publicity Interest Litigation' or 'Private Interest Litigation' and we say so for the reason that at paragraphs 4.6 and 4.7, petitioner clearly admits that husband of petitioner was also an applicant for allotment of land and also claims that particular tribe/ caste to which he belongs had also applied for 20 Gunthas of Gamtal land and were unsuccessful before the revenue authorities. Thus, it can easily be inferred that petitioner has an axe to grind against respondent authorities. On this short ground itself, petitioner is liable to be non-suited. Even otherwise, from the averments made in the petition, it can be gathered that petitioner intends to raise a disputed question of fact, including question of alleged fraud, said to have been perpetrated by allottees of gaucher / gamtal Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 25 21:27:49 IST 2022 C/WPPIL/31/2018 ORDER DATED: 21/07/2022 land in fabricating the revenue records. This aspect as admitted by the petitioner, being a disputed question of fact, cannot be gone in a proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and such, on this ground also, petition is liable to be dismissed. Hence, we proceed to pass following:
ORDER (1) Petition stands DISMISSED with costs.
(2) Consequently, consideration of Civil Application No.1 of 2022 does not arise, stands REJECTED.
(3) We quantify the cost at 5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand only) payable by petitioner to the Chief Minister Covid Fund within FOUR WEEKS, failing which Collector, Banaskantha would be at liberty to recover the same from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue.
Sd/-
(ARAVIND KUMAR,CJ) Sd/-
(ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J) OMKAR Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Jul 25 21:27:49 IST 2022