Gujarat High Court
Judgename :N.K.VAKIL
PATEL RAGHAV NATHA - Appellant
Versus
G.F.MANKODI,commissioner,rajkot DIVISION - Respondent
S.C.A. 31 of 1962
Decided On : 07/27/1964
Constitution of India – Article 227 – Land Revenue Code section 211, 65 – Bombay Land Revenue Rules – Rule 37 – Property Dispute – Jurisdiction Issue – The order of the Commissioner is challenged before me by the petitioner on the following grounds – The Commissioner or the State Government had no authority under section 211 of the Code to revise the order of the Collector so as to affect the agreement or Sanad granted to him – The Commissioners order is not a speaking order as no reasons are given by him for setting aside the Collectors order and therefore it should be quashed –The question of title to the land was not in controversy at all before the Collector and therefore it was not open to the Commissioner to permit the Municipality to agitate that question and the Commissioner had no jurisdiction to decide that question – In case the above points are not accepted the order of the Commssioner is bad even on merits as the Commissioner had erred in law in allowing the questions to be agitated before him which were not agitated before the Collector and which involved considerations which were completely foreign to those which were actually before the Collector – Held, to mind the term included in this agreement can only mean that over and above the conditions which were specifically mentioned in the agreement other conditions contained in any of the provisions of the Code which can apply to such a grant shall also apply – In courts view therefore sec. 211 could not apply to the agreement even if it is tried to be so made applicable by this particular condition – If in law there is no jurisdiction under sec. 211 to revise an agreement no amount of terms included in a document between the parties can vest in the authority that jurisdiction – Court find it difficult to accept the submissions made on behalf of the Municipality whereby they have urged that the inclusion of this condition would entitle the Government to revise the agreement itself under its powers under sec. 211 – It must be held that the Commissioners order is without authority and that there was no jurisdiction vested in him to pass an order which goes to nullify the agreement – In courts view the Sanad or the agreement passed in this case as a result of the Collectors order still stands and is binding on both the sides till it is set aside in due course of law – Order passed by the Commissioner is set aside – Petition Allowed
( 1 ) THIS writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner Rajkot Division purporting to be under his revisional powers under section 211 of the Land Revenue Code where by he set aside the order passed by the Collector Rajkot District which granted the permission to the petitioner to use 2 acres and 10 gunthas:- of his land out of survey No. 417 for non-agricultural use. The petitioner was a resident of the State of Rajkot as it then existed and at an auction sale effected by the State he had acquired the agricultural land bearing survey No. 417 which in all measured about 12 acres and 12 gunthas. He had so purchased this land on the 22nd of September 1938. The petitioner therefore claimed to be owner and occupant of the said land. In the year 1944 the then State of Rajkot by its order dated 11-7-1944 acquired according to the petitioner 3 acres of land out of the said survey number for Ramkrishna Mission. Deducting this area the petitioner was left with 9 acres and 12 gunthas of the land in his survey No. 417. At a later stage when Government acquired certain lands he in company with 21 other persons whose land were so acquired had applied to the Government to allow certain parts of their lands to be used for non-agricultural purposes and accordingly the petitioner applied for permission to use for non agricultural use 4 acres and 39 gunthas out of his remaining land 9 acres and 12 gunthas. This permission was granted by the then State of Saurashtra by a notification No. REV. 2/4/a-1/267 dated 21st May 1955 the State of Rajkot having merged in the new State. This was a common Notification by the State Government as regards the lands of the 22 claimants. The State of Saurashtra then acquired 2 acres and 3 gunthas of land for Bhaktinagar Station Yard. According to the petitioner therefore he was left with 2 acres and 10 gunthas of agricultural land out of the whole survey No. 417 of 12 acres and 12 gunthas. He continued to pay assessment to Government for these 2 acres and 10 gunthas as agricultural land. On the 20th of October 1958 the petitioner applied to the Collector of Rajkot for permission to convert the remaining land admeasuring 2 acres and 10 gunthas to non-agricultural use under section 65 of the Land Revenue Code. For the sake of convenience I shall be referring to the Bombay Land Revenue Code as the Code. This petition however was rejected by the Collector without assigning any reasons. The petitioner then approached in appeal to the then Divisional Commissioner of Rajkot who remanded the matter to the Collector for passing appropriate orders on making inquiry. On remand the then Collector of Rajkot after holding an inquiry decided in favour of the petitioner and granted the permission to the petitioner to use the land for non-agricultural use by his order dated 2 July 1960. Pursuant to this decision taken by the Collector a Sanad was issued by him to the petitioner on 27-7-1960 which included the terms according to the petitioner of the agreement between the Government and the petitioner on which he was allowed to make use of it for non-agricultural purposes. The Sanad was granted for a period of 30 years and it also fixed certain higher assessment. It may be noted that this Sanad was issued in Form M as prescribed by the Code and it was executed by the Collector on behalf of the Governor of the State and the petitioner. . . . . . . . . It appears that when the Collector was inquiring into this matter and as the lands were situated within the municipal area of the Rajkot Borough Municipality the Collector had sent a sketch prepared under his orders by the District Inspector of Land Records to the Municipality for their comments and objections if any. The Municipality thereupon wrote a letter to the Collector and raised certain contentions. I shall have occasion later to refer to them. The Collector however decided the matter in favour of the petitioner as stated above and issu
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.