( 1 ) THE order passed by respondent No. 2 firstly on 6th August 1984 and subsequently on 13th September 1984 as affirmed in revision by and on behalf of respondent No. 1 by the order passed on 31st March 1986 is under challenge in this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. By the impugned order passed on 6th August 1984 respondent No. 2 directed the petitioners to pay Rs. 432/- and the local fund cess for starting construction without his permission. By his impugned order passed on 13th September 1984 respondent No. 2 granted permission to the petitioners for non-agricultural use of lands bearing survey Nos. 213 and 214 on payment at the rate of 6 paise per square metre with effect from 1st August 1976.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this petition move in a narrow compass. Petitioner No. 1 is a company duly registered under the relevant company legislation (the Company for convenience ). Petitioner No. 2 is a shareholder and is also its Chairman and Managing Director. The Company is engaged in manufacture of several chemical items. It possesses several parcles of land admeasuring more than 800 acres. Its holding includes survey Nos. 213 and 214. They were not converted for non-agricultural use. The Company wanted to raise its Dinitro Chloro Benzene Plant (the Plant for convenience) on some part of the aforesaid two parcels of land. According to the petitioners no permission for non-agricultural use of the aforesaid parcels of land was necessary. However the Company applied for construction of its Plant to respondent No. 2. It appears that initially such permission was refused inter alia on the ground that the construction activity was already started before obtaining such permission. The revisional authority however remanded the matter to respondent No. 2 for passing orders for regularisation of construction on levying appropriate penalty. Thereupon by his order passed on 6th August 1984 respondent No. 2 regularised the construction by levying penalty in the sum of Rs. 432/- and the local fund cess. Its copy is at Annexure-F to this petition. The petitioners have challenged this order in this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. Coming back to the narration of facts by his order passed on 13th September 1984 respondent No. 2 permitted the Company to make non-agricultural use of survey Nos. 213 and 214 for the purpose of raising its Plant in question on payment at the rate of 6 paise per square metre. Its copy is at Annexure-B to this petition. The Company carried the matter in revision before respondent No. 1. By the order passed by and on behalf of respondent No. 1 on 31 March 1986 the revisional application came to be rejected. Its copy is at Annexure-A to this petition. The aggrieved petitioners have thereupon approached this Court by means of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for questioning the correctness of the order at Annexure-B to this petition as affirmed in revision by the order at Annexure-A to this petition.

( 3 ) SO far as the legality and validity of the order at Annexure-F to this petition is concerned I do not think it calls for any interference by this Court for the simple reason that the amount involved is very small. The penalty imposed is in the sum of Rs. 432/- and the applicable local fund cess. For a company like petitioner No. 1 no useful purpose will be served even if it is not set aside on finding it illegal or invalid. I have therefore not chosen to examine the merits of that order.

( 4 ) BEFORE examining the legality and validity of the impugned order at Annexure-B to this petition as affirmed in revision by the order at Annexure-A to this petition is concerned it would be quite proper to look at Rule 81 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Rules 1972 (the Rules for brief) framed under the Bombay Land Revenue Code 1879 (the Code for brief ). Thereunder areas have been classified in five different