Jayantilal Gokaldas Limbachiya vs State Of Gujarat Thro President & on 14 November, 2014

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Gujarat High Court

Jayantilal Gokaldas Limbachiya vs State Of Gujarat Thro President & on 14 November, 2014

Bench: R.M.Chhaya

       C/SCA/1656/2013                       ORDER



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

     SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION  NO. 1656 of 2013
===================================================
   JAYANTILAL GOKALDAS LIMBACHIYA....Petitioner(s)
                       Versus
         STATE OF GUJARAT THRO PRESIDENT  & 
                 4....Respondent(s)
===================================================
Appearance:
MR DAKSHESH MEHTA, ADVOCATE for Petitioner(s) No. 1
MS ASMITA PATEL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No.14
MR DHIRENDRA MEHTA, ADVOCATE for Respondent Nos.5.15.3
===================================================
      CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
                  Date : 14/11/2014
                      ORAL ORDER

(1) Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

(2) By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged order dated 14.12.2012 passed by respondent No.1 Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, Ahmedabad, in Revision Application No.TEN/BA/569/10 whereby the order passed by respondent No.3Dy. Collector (Land Reforms), Mehsana, in Tenancy/Dispute/20/2010 dated 24.09.2010 as well as the original order dated 05.04.2010 passed by respondent No.4Mamlatdar & ALT, Kheralu, in Tenancy Case No.32o47/09 came to be quashed and set aside and the proceedings were Page 1 of 4 C/SCA/1656/2013 ORDER remanded for rehearing, after following principles of natural justice.

(3) Learned advocate for the petitioner does not invite any reason for passing this order, however, he has asserted that the authority, before whom the proceedings are remanded i.e. respondentMamlatdar and ALT, Kheralu, should decide the same within stipulated time, without in any manner being influenced by any of the observation made in the earlier proceedings / orders.

(4) Mr.Dhirendra Mehta, learned advocate for the private respondents, has assured this Court that private respondent Nos.5.1 to 5.3 herein shall cooperate with the hearing before the respondentMamlatdar and ALT.

(5) In light of the aforesaid following directions are given that:

(i) respondentMamlatdar and ALT, Kheralu shall fix hearing of the remand case arising out of Tenancy Case No.32o47/09 Page 2 of 4 C/SCA/1656/2013 ORDER latest by 01.12.2014 and shall inform the parties accordingly;

(ii) petitioner as well as private parties shall be permitted by the respondent Mamlatdar and ALT to adduce any further or other evidence;

(iii) respondentMamlatdar and ALT is further directed to hear the parties and shall dispose of the proceedings so remanded latest by 30.06.2015, after giving opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned and after following the principles of natural justice shall decide the proceedings de novo afresh on its own merits, without in any manner being influenced by the observations made by any authority, including any of the observations made by this Court in the present order.

It is further clarified that it would be open for the parties to raise all contentions that are available to them.

(6) Learned counsel for the petitioner as well as private respondent Nos.5.1 to 5.3 Page 3 of 4 C/SCA/1656/2013 ORDER assure that the parties shall not take any unnecessary adjournment before the respondentMamlatdar and ALT once the matter is fixed for hearing.

(7) With these observations, the petition stands disposed of. NOTICE discharged. There shall be no order as to costs. Direct service permitted.

Sd/ [R.M.CHHAYA, J ] *** Bhavesh[pps]* Page 4 of 4

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Gujarat High Court