( 1 ) IN this petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 17th January 2004/21st February 2004 passed by the secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, government of Gujarat, in Revision application No. 44 of 2003 partly allowing the same and quashing and setting aside the order passed by the Collector, Surat, dated 9th April 2003 as well as the order passed by Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, surat dated 6th July 2002 and confirming the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Choryasi prant dated 11. 6. 2001 iu respect to the revenue entry No. 4892 dated 15th february 2001 and further passing an order to make necessary entry with regard to injunction granted by Civil Court in Regular civil Suit No. 156 of 2001 and the entry would be subject to the ultimate outcome of the suit pending between the parties.

( 2 ) THE petitioner, Gandabhai dalpatbhai Patel was owner of land bearing survey No. 306, Block No, 287 situate at village Pal, Taluka Choryasi, District Surat. The petitioner had executed one power of attorney in favour of Jagjivanbhai madhabhai Patel on 11th March, 1982, The power of attorney holder Jagjivanbhai madhabhai Patel had executed the sale deed in favour of respondent No. 5 herein on 20th april 2000 and sold the land in question to the respondent No. 5 Vimalkumar khandubhai Patel. Necessary entry was also made in the record of rights vide entry no. 4892 on 15th February 2001. The petitioner herein objected to the said entry being mutated in the name of respondent no. 1 herein purchaser in the revenue record and objections were submitted before mamlatdar, Choryasi Prant, Surat. The mamlatdar, Choryasi Prant treated the same as RTS Disputed Case No. 10 of 2001 and after considering the objections submitted by the petitioner herein confirmed Entry No. 4892 dated 15th february 2001 and directed to certify the said entry. 2. 1. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Mamlatdar, choryasi dated llth June 2001 passed in rts Disputed Case No. 10 of 2001 the petitioner preferred appeal before the deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat being RTS Appeal No. 47 of 2001 and the deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat vide his judgment and order dated 6. 7. 2002 allowed the said appeal by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the mamlatdar, Choryasi dated llth June 2001. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order dated 6. 7. 2002 passed by the Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, surat in RTS Appeal No. 47 of 2001, the respondent No. 5 preferred appeal before the collector and the Collector, Surat vide his judgment and order dated llth April 2003 dismissed the said revision application/ appeal and confirmed the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Surat dated 6. 7. 2002. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the Collector, surat dated 10th April, 2003 In RTS Appeal no. 35 of 2002 in dismissing the same and confirming the order passed by the Deputy collector, Choryasi Prant dated 6. 7. 2002 in cancelling Entry No. 4892 dated 15th february 2001 the respondent No. 5 preferred revision application before the state Government, i. e. . Secretary (Appeals), revenue Department, was numbered as revision Application No. 44 of 2003. The secretary (Appeals), considering the fact that Civil Suits are pending between the parties and the dispute with regard to title cannot be decided by the Revenue authorities in RTS proceedings partly allowed the revision application by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the collector, Surat dated 9th April 2003 as well as the judgment and order passed by the Deputy Collector, Choryasi Prant, Surat dated 6. 7. 2002 restoring the order passed by Mamlatdar, Choryasi dated 11. 6. 2001. However, considering the fact that there was an injunction granted by Civil Court in regular Civil Suit No. 156 of 2001 the revis