( 1 ) IN this group of 14 petitions which demonstrate common questions of law and facts, not much but every thing would depend upon the say of the supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Patel Raghav Natha, (1969) X GLR 992.

( 2 ) THE question which was presented before the Supreme Court for consideration and decision was in respect of the time lag, during which the powers under Sec. 211 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 could be exercised. The pronouncement takes into consideration the date of granting of the orders for the non-agricultural use, namely July 02, 1960, along with the date of the setting aside of the orders of the Collector, namely, 12th October, 1961. The pronouncement also takes into consideration the fact that, there is no period of limitation prescribed under Sec. 211 of the Code. After pointing out this Statutory position, the pronouncement goes further to say that this power must be exercised within a reasonable time and the length of the reasonable time must be determined by the facts of the case and nature of the order which is being revised. Any how the Apex Court also further says that Sec. 65 of the Code indicates the length of the reasonable time