( 1 ) HEARD Mr. P. J. Vyas, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and Mr. Samir Dave, learned AGP for respondent No. 1. No one appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2 and Mr. K. K. Trivedi, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 6 to 14.

( 2 ) IN the present petition, RULE has been issued by this Court on 27th July, 1994 and granted ad-interim relief on condition to file undertaking by the petitoner on or before 31st August, 1994. Accordingly, undertaking has been filed by the petitoner on 27th August, 1994 which is on record.

( 3 ) THE brief facts of the present petition are as under.

( 4 ) THE respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are the owners of the land block No. 502 situated in the sim of Olpad admeasuring As. 8-33 Gs. [ 35714 sq. mtrs ]. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 made an application on 8-4-1982 to the respondent no. 4 Taluka Development Officer under Section 65 of th Bombay Land Revenue Code seeking N. A. permissin for residence and industrial purpose. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 requested to grant N. A. permission for residence from block no. 502 paiki for 8590 sdq. mtrs. and for industrial purpose fom block No. 502 paiki 27124 sq. mtrs. The Taluka Panchayat Executive Committe passed resolution to grant N. A. permission as asked for by respondent Nos. 2 and 3. The Taluka Development Officer, respondent No. 4 herein by order dated 4-5-1982 granted N. A. permission to respondnet Nos. 2 and 3 on certain terms and conditions stated in the order. The said lands has been purchased by the petitioners by registered sale deed on 2nd September, 1982 from the respondent nos. 2 and 3. Thereafter, they had also sold the plots to the different persons including respondent Nos. 5 to 14 by sale deeds on different dates. The petitioners also stated that N. A. assessment is being paid by the petitioners. It is also the case of the petitioners that as the lay out plans were approved at the time N. A. permission was granted. The petitioner No. 3 had also obtained permission from the group Gram Panchayat, Olpad to put the constructin and the Group Gram Panchayat, Olpad granted permission by its resolution passed on 6th September, 1990. It is also submitted that at the time of filing of the petition, said construction on the land in question upto plinth level on certain plots is made.

( 5 ) THE District Development Officer, Jilla Panchayat, Surat addressed a letter dated 16th October, 1989 to the Assistant Collector, Olpad Prant to take into suo motu revision the order of the Taluka Development Officer under Section 211 of the Code. Pursuant to the said letter dated 16th October, 1989 addressed by the District Development Officer to the Assistant Collector, Olpad the Prant Officer issued notice dated 23rd April, 1990 to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to show cause why N. A. permission be not cancelled mainly on the grounds that before granting N. A. permission, the Taluka Development Office did not obtain opinion regarding conclusion of the land from the Land Acquisiton Officer and since no opinion is obtained from the Deputy Town Planner, the plans approved and N. A. permission order are not forwarded by the registered post, which resulted into breach of condition No. 4. But in pursuance of the registered sale deed executed by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in favour of the petitioners, names of the petitiones came to be mutated in village form No. 6 and entry also came to be certified by the Revenue authorities. The contention which has been raised by thepetitioners that suo motu power under Section 211 of the Code is exercised after almost 7 years and the Revenue Ofice did not pursue the revenue records and did not issue notice to show cause why N. A. permission granted by the Taluka Development Officer be not cancelled.

( 6 ) THE Assistant Collector, Olpad Prant, Surat by his order dated 1st October, 1990 cancelled the N. A. pemission granted by the Taluka Development Officer. Against that order, Appeal No. 5