Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. As aforesaid, the Collector, Kutch, has recorded in detail, about the stand of the allottees. The Collector, after hearing the petitioners, third parties and the State Government, directed vesting of the land in the State Government and as aforesaid, also cancelled the order dated 11.02.2008, passed by the Mamlatdar, converting the land from new C/SCA/2341/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2023 tenure to old tenure and the entry no.349 of sale. The Collector, in its order, has categorically recorded that the land has been allotted to the refugees at Tharad. But, the land continued to remain in the name of the allottees. It is further recorded that there is a lapse on the part of the local office. That the Talati has not informed to the higher authority about the allottees not using the land. Despite the land having not being used by the original allottee, it has been converted into old tenure land. The Collector has also noted about the transaction of the year 2007 and conversion of the land in the year 2008 from new tenure to old tenure. The said illegality has not been attributed to the allottees or petitioners, but the third parties. Taking note of the private complaint, the Collector had also recommended initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the officers. With the aforesaid observations, the Collector passed an order dated 13.05.2011 whereby, the land in question of village Bambhansar was directed to be vested in the State Government. Additionally, the Collector also quashed the order of the Mamlatdar, converting the land from new tenure to old tenure, so also the entry. In the whole order of the Collector, Kutch, there is not a whisper or any allegation worth the name, made against the petitioners or any of the allottees about illegal disposal of the land.

14. In the revision application before the Collector, the petitioners have taken all the available grounds, including filing of the application and bringing it to the notice of the authorities about the disposal of the land illegally. It is required to be noted that the order of the Collector is running into four paragraphs. In paragraph 1, it has given the details of the proceedings, followed by the paragraph wherein, the contentions of the petitioners have been recorded. In paragraph 2, the Collector recorded the stand of the petitioners and in subsequent paragraph, the Collector had given its finding. Sub-paragraph (1), is about allotment of the land in favour of the petitioners in the year 1988, thereafter, the fact about the petitioners not C/SCA/2341/2023 ORDER DATED: 16/02/2023 handing over the possession and taking benefits at two places. In the third paragraph, the reference is of the conversion of the land from new tenure to old tenure and sale in favour of third parties so also, the order of the Collector dated 13.05.2011. In unnumbered paragraph 3, the Collector took note of the fact of allotment of the land on new and impartible tenure. In the subsequent paragraph, which would be penultimate paragraph, the Collector, while taking note of the order dated 13.05.2011 passed by the Collector, Kutch as well as the order dated 30.05.2012 passed by the Assistant Collector, straightaway concluded that there is a breach of condition no.11. However, disregarding the grounds raised by the petitioners, the Collector has straightaway, without applying its mind, has confirmed the order of the Assistant Collector dated 30.05.2012. which exhibits sheer non- application of mind on the part of the Collector for, none of the grounds raised by the petitioners in the revision application has been dealt with.

Therefore, both the orders, namely, the order of the Assistant Collector dated 30.05.2012 as well as the order dated 24.12.2013 passed by the District Collector, deserve to be quashed and set aside."

9. In the present case, the Collector, Kachchh, has passed an order dated 13.5.2011. The Collector, noted the fact that the names of the allottees continued in the revenue record. Despite the fact that the allottees were not utilising the land, has converted the land from new tenure to old tenure for the purpose of agriculture for which, order has been passed dated 29.9.2008. The sale deed has also been executed, which aspect has been denied by the heirs of the original allottee on the ground that their names have been misused for the purpose of creating forged documents. It was also brought to the notice of the Collector that a private complaint has been filed. The Collector, was also of the opinion that disciplinary proceedings, are required to be initiated against the employees of the State Government. With these observations, the Collector, Kachchh, quashed and set aside the order of the Mamlatdar dated 18.12.2008, converting the land from new tenure to old tenure and also cancelled the entry no.287. Moreover, the Collector directed the land to be vested in the State Government. The Collector, has noted the facts about allotment in the year 1988. Also the fact that the allottees have not taken any steps and their names continued in the revenue record. With respect to the lands in the districts of Kachchh and Banaskantha, the Collector has observed that the allottees, have taken dual benefits. It is also recorded in the order that there appears to be communication gap between the two offices of the districts, namely, Kachchh and Banaskantha. The Collector, was of the opinion that the allottees have committed breach of condition 10 and therefore, directed vesting of the land of Kachchh in the State Government.