Back
Gujarat High Court
Judgename :N.B.PATEL, P.R.GOKULAKRISHNAN
JASHUBHAI HIRALAL GANDHI - Appellant
Versus
COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND DEPUTY COLLECTOR,ahmedabad - Respondent
Appeal dismissed
Decided On : 03/23/1990
Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Acts 1976 – Sec. 6 – Town Planning Act – Bombay Tenancy Act – Sec. 63 – Land Ceiling – Letters Patent Appeals – Both these Letters Patent Appeals arise out of a common order passed in Special Civil Application No. 6068 and 6069 of 1988 – This is a typical case where legality and validity of the orders passed by the authorities under the Land Ceiling Act declaring the plots of the lands in excess are challenged by various proceedings in order to scuttle the acquisition of excess lauds for public purposes – Held, from the facts we have discussed above and from the provisions of the U L. C. Act it is clear that the writ proceedings entertained by this Court cannot be considered as original proceedings of this Court decided by the learned single Judge – It is clear from the provisions of the U. L. C. Act that orders passed by the authorities concerned duly declaring the excess lands are of quasi judicial nature and not administrative orders – Hence the writ proceedings which were entertained by the learned single Judge and disposed of by him can only be under Art. 227 of the Constitution and as such Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent is not maintainable – In view of discussion made above and from the observations made by the learned single Judge of our High Court in the judgment rendered in Special Civil Applications No. 6068 and 6069 it is clear that both on facts and in law these Letters Patent Appeals are not competent and also have no merit – For those reasons both Letters Patent Appeals are dismissed – Appeal Dismissed
( 1 ) THIS is a typical case where legality and validity of the orders passed by the authorities under the Land Ceiling Act declaring the plots of the lands in excess are challenged by various proceedings in order to scuttle the acquisition of excess lauds for public purposes.
( 2 ) BOTH these Letters Patent Appeals arise out of a common order passed in Special Civil Application No. 6068 of 1988 and Special Civil Application No. 6069 of 1988. In both these Letters Patent Appeals Mr. Vin appears for the appellants Mr. Antani appears for respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and Mr. Pujara appears for respondents Nos. 3 4 and 5. The learned Counsels appearing for the respondents got notice and say that the matters be heard and decided finally. Mr. Vin is agreeable in taking up these appeals for final hearing today and therefore the arguments were heard.
( 3 ) LETTERS Patent Appeal No. 111 of 1989 is filed by the alleged irrevocable power of attorney-holder of the original land-holders i. e. respondents Nos. 3 to 5 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 111 of 1989. Letters Patent Appeal No. 112 of 1989 is filed by the purchasers of the land as late as in 23/04/1986
( 4 ) THE short facts of these cases necessary for the purpose of disposing of these two Letters Patent Anneals are that there were four pieces of land bearing Survey Nos. 300/1. 310/2 313 and 439/1 situate at village Vijalpur. The total area of these survey numbers is I acre and 26 gunthas i. e. 7986 sq. yards equivalent to 6677 sq. mts. These lands stood initially in the name of one Babaji Manaji. After his death his wife Laxmiben his daughter Punjiben and his another daughter Ujaben got the same by succession. The Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Acts 1976 hereafter referred to as the U. L. C. Act) came into force on 17/02/1976 The heirs of Babaji Manaji filed a form duly filed in under Sec. 6 (1) of the U. L. C. Act respect of these lands a scheme under the Town Planning Act also came into force. That was Town Planning scheme No. 5. In that Town Planning Scheme these lands were reconstituted and final Plot No. 73 was given to Survey No. 300/1; final Plot No. 88 was given to Survey No. 310/2; final Plot No 93 was given to Survey No. 313/3 and final Plot No. 204 was given to Survey No. 439/1. Under the Town Planning Scheme the area of these lands was reduced and these survey numbers which originally admeasured 6677 sq. mts. came to be reduced to 4704 sq. mts.
( 5 ) THE authority authorised under Sec. 6 of the U. L. C. Act disposed of the form filled in by the land-holders by an order dated 8/07/1982 which is Annexure A to the Special Civil Application. By this order dated 8/07/1982 the land-holders who are three in number as stated above got three units admeasuring 1000 sq. mts. each and after leaving these 1000 sq. mts. to each of these land-holders 1704 sq mts. were declared excess. Since the land-holders desired that this excess land may be taken from Plot No. 204 which is original Survey No. 439/1 the authority allowed the same. Subsequent to this order passed by the competent authority an appeal was filed under Sec. 33 of the U. L C. Act. That appeal come to be disposed of on 12/09/1984 The State Government has also filed a cross-appeal against the order of the competent authority. The appellate authority remanded the appeal filed by the land-holders and disposed of the appeal filed by the State Government by stating that inasmuch as the appeal filed by the land-holders has been remanded nothing survives in the appeal filed by the State Government in the meanwhile the State Government has issued notice under Sec. 34 of the U. L. C. Act requiring the land-holders to show cause as to why the order passed by the competent authority should not be revised. The said notice was not invoked and the same came to be closed on 9/05/1984 by another order dated 27/06/1984
( 6 ) ON 6/04/1981 the heirs of Babaji Manaji i. e. three ladies entered Into an agreeme
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
