Amarsinh Govubhai Rana vs State Of Gujarat on 16 July, 2018

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Amarsinh Govubhai Rana vs State Of Gujarat on 16 July, 2018

Bench: Rajesh H.Shukla

         C/SCA/13619/2007                                       JUDGMENT




            IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

             R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13619 of 2007


FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA

==========================================================

1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to
      see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the
      judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question of law
      as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India or any
      order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
                             AMARSINH GOVUBHAI RANA
                                     Versus
                                STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR PS CHAMPANERI(214) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1,2
MR. MANAN MEHTA ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER(1) for the
RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
RULE SERVED BY DS(65) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================

    CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAJESH H.SHUKLA

                                   Date : 16/07/2018

                                   ORAL JUDGMENT

The present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles 14 , 19 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India as well as provisions of the Gujarat Page 1 of 4 C/SCA/13619/2007 JUDGMENT Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1976 with a prayer as prayed for inter alia that appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that the decision of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in clubbing of total holding and deciding the ceiling of the land be quashed and set aside.

2. Heard learned advocate Shri Champaneri for the petitioner and learned Asstt. Government Pleader Shri Manan Mehta.

3. Learned advocate Shri Champaneri, for the petitioner, referred to the papers and submitted that as observed by the Tribunal in the impugned order, the notice is said to have been issued under sections 20 and 21 to the petitioner no.1 to decide about the excess holding for the purpose of surrendering the land. However, he pointedly referred to the background of facts as well as the contention raised and submitted that the moot question with regard to the right of the daughters and the mother being female members of the family who would also be entitled to have a share, has not been considered. He submitted that provisions of Hindu Succession Act would entitle the mother and the daughters to have a share in the family property ie land and therefore, the order of the Tribunal is erroneous.

Page 2 of 4

C/SCA/13619/2007 JUDGMENT However, he submitted that the impugned order has been passed wherein the matter is remanded to Mamlatdar and ALT to decide the question in view of the provisions of section 20 and 21 of the Act which may also be set aside and the matter may be remanded to the Tribunal to decide on this issue with regard to the share of the female members of the family as the ground has also been taken in the petition and also before the authorities below.

3. Learned Asstt. Government Pleader, resisted and submitted that the amendment in Hindu Succession Act, 2005 would not have any application and it has been clarified in subsection (2) of Section 2 that this provision of amended Act may not have applicability of deciding fixation of ceiling or of devolution of Tenancy rights. As it transpires from the record, it is not in dispute that even before the amendment in the Hindu Succession Act by way of Hindu Succession (amendment ) 2005, the provisions of Hindu Succession, 1956 provide for the rights of the female members in the joint family and also the rules of succession. Therefore, the mother who would be widow is entitled to share in the land holding of the family for the purpose of ceiling which have not been considered as stated by learned advocate Shri Champaneri.

Page 3 of 4

C/SCA/13619/2007 JUDGMENT

4. It is in this circumstances, without expressing any opinion, the interest of justice would be served if the impugned order passed by the Revision Application in TEN.B.A 315 of 1998 Annexure C dated 27.4.2001 by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal is quashed and set aside and also the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Dhrangadhra in Tenancy Appeal No. 7/97 is quashed and set aside with a direction that the matter may be considered afresh by the Deputy Collector, Dharangadhra being Tenancy Appeal No. 7/97 regarding the claim of the female members of the family.

4.1 Therefore, it is directed that the Deputy Collector, Dhrangadhra shall decide the Tenancy Appeal No. 7/97 afresh in accordance with law after providing an opportunity of hearing to the applicants preferably within a period of 3 months. The interim relief shall continue till then it is decided by the Deputy Collector afresh. Rule is made absolute. No costs.

(RAJESH H.SHUKLA, J) MARY Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court