( 1 ) IN this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the judgment and order dated 14. 6. 2004 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (grt) in Revision Application No. TEN. BA 756/92 in dismissing the same and confirming the order passed by the Mamlatdar and ALT dated 18. 9. 1989 in Ganot Case No. 119/89 and also the order passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Appeals, Mehsana, dated 1. 7. 1992 in Appeal No. 401/91.

( 2 ) ONE Shri Ambalal Harjivandas was owner of lands bearing Survey Nos. 252 and 212 of Kalol. The said land were new tenure and restricted lands as the original landowner namely Ambalal Harjivandas was a tenant (Ganotia ). It is the case of the petitioner that the heirs of Ambalal Harjivandas applied to the District Collector, Mehsana, for conversion of the land into old tenure land and for Non-Agricultural permission and an order came to be passed by the District Collector for converting the land with Non-Agricultural use permission on 1st December 1981. It is the case of the petitioner that the heirs of Ambalal Harjivandas entered into a sale transaction by registered Sale Deed with regard to land in question on 12th February 1982 and the property in question came to be purchased by one Shri Laxminagar Cooperative Housing Society (Proposed), Kalol {hereinafter referred to as "the proposed society"), through its main organiser, Jugalbhai Raichandbhai Raval and Amrutbhai Chhanabhai Raval (as secretary ). That thereafter necessary entry was mutated in the record of rights being Revenue Entry No. 6776 in favour of the proposed society and a further Entry No. 6778 was mutated for Non-Agricultural use permission on 7th December 1985. The Mamlatdar and ALT, Kalol was of the opinion that there was a breach of Section 84 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 {hereinafter referred to as "the said Act" ). By virtue of the aforesaid transaction between the heirs of Ambalal Harjivandas and the proposed society and on the ground that the transaction was in breach of the provisions of Sections 43, 63 and 64-A of the Act proceedings were initiated by way of Tenancy Case No. 119 of 1989. The Mamlatdar and ALT, Kalol, by order dated 18. 9. 1989 held the transaction between the heirs of Ambalal Harjivandas and the proposed society as invalid and an order came to be passed in favour of the State under Section 84-C (1) of the Act forfeiting the land to the State Government. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Mamlatdar and ALT, Kalol, dated 18. 9. 1989 in Ganot Case No. 119/1989, Shri Jugabhai Raichandrabhai Raval as Chief Promoter of the proposed Society, preferred Tenancy Appeal No. 401/1991 before the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Appeals, Mehsana, who by his order dated 1. 7. 1992 dismissed the same on the ground of limitation as the same was filed beyond the period of limitation. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Mehsana, dated 1. 7. 1992 in Tenancy Appeal No. 401/91, the proposed Society preferred Revision Application No. TEN. BA 56/1992 before the GRT and the GRT by judgment and order dated 14. 6. 2004 dismissed the said revision application even considering the case of the society on merits rather than remanding the matter to the Deputy Collector who dismised the appeal on the ground of limitation and even considering the submission on behalf of the petitioner that subsequently in the year 2000 the society is already registered, and confirmed the order passed by both the authorities below. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order passed by the GRT dated 14. 6. 2004 in Revision Application TEN. BA No. 56/1992, the proposed sciety through one Ishwarbhai Ramdas Patel has preferred the Special Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

( 3 ) IT appears from the record that it was submitted by the p