ORDER DATED: 20/04/2023
undefined
Department (Appeals) (for short 'the SSRD').
3. The brief facts of the case are as under ... accordance with law. The
petiitoners challenged the order dated
15.02.2020 before the SSRD by way of filing
Revision under Rule 108(6)(A) of Bombay
order dated 07.07.2018 passed
by the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue
Department ['SSRD' for short].
Page 2 of 11
Downloaded ... Application challenging order dated
29.01.2018 before the Special Secretary,
Revenue Department. The SSRD vide order dated
07.07.2018 remanded the matter back to the
Collector
Special Secretary, Revenue Department
(Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as "the learned SSRD") in MVV/
HKP/PTN/ 41 of 2014. The dispute, revolves around ... hereinabove. The petitioner
being aggrieved, preferred a Revision Application before the
learned SSRD, which, rejected the same and the order of the
Collector, has been
Ahmedabad in
Revision Application No. JMN/PRB/7/2007, whereby the learned
SSRD has directed the learned Collector, Porbandar to regularise
the encroachment ... private
respondents by way of aforesaid revision application before the
learned SSRD. By the impugned order, the learned SSRD has
directed the learned Collector
regularized as per Government Resolution dated
11.6.1968. He has submitted that learned SSRD has
remanded the matter to Collector to decide the same in light ... same. He has submitted that the petitioner has not
approached learned SSRD against the impugned order of the
Collector and, therefore, there being an alternative
passed by respondent
No.1/2, Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue
Department ("SSRD "), in Revision Application
No.MVV/HKP/BNS/144/14, whereby ... mentioned
revision application against the aforesaid order
of the Collector, before the SSRD, which is
pending adjudication. Along with the revision
application the petitioner filed
ORDER
Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeal), Ahmedabad
(hereinafter referred to as the 'SSRD' for
short). In the meantime, legal representative
Vanubhai sold the land ... Revision Application No.25 of 2007 was
not heard by SSRD, the petitioners filed Special
Civil Application No.4107 of 2008 before this
Court. This
aside the order dated
29.12.2003 passed by the respondent No.2 - SSRD
(Annexure-S) and to declare that the respondent
No.4 had no right ... application was decided against it (Annexure-O).
3. The respondent No.2 (SSRD) thereafter heard the
learned Advocates for the parties and vide the
impugned
contended that by way of impugned
order dated 08.04.2019, the respondent - SSRD has
partly allowed the Revision Application and while
partly allowing the Revision Application ... provision of the Act of 1947. It
is contended that the respondent SSRD has no
jurisdiction to issue such type of direction to
the authority
petitioners
preferred revision a application before the Special
Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) (SSRD), which
was admitted. Along with the revision application, the
petitioners have preferred ... regard were advanced by
the learned advocate for the petitioners before the
SSRD during the hearing of the application for interim
Page
