1. Since all these matters are inter-connected with each other and they are heard together, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Special Civil Application No.14179 of 2007 is filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 28.05.2007 passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) in stay application preferred by the private respondents in Revision Application No.19 of 2006.

3. This Court has issued rule on 15.06.2007 and ad-interim relief was granted in terms of para 27 (B) of the petition whereby the impugned order dated 28.05.2007 was stayed by this Court.

4. During the pendency of this petition, respondent Nos. 2.1 to 2.6 have filed Civil Application No.13999 of 2008 for vacation of the interim relief granted by this Court on 15.06.2007 and continued thereafter till this date.

5. Similarly, Special Civil Application No.14181 of 2007 is filed by the petitioners challenging the order passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) in Revision Application No.19 of 2006 whereby the said revision application was admitted after condoning the delay of more than 17 years. This Court has admitted the petition vide its order dated 15.06.2007 and ad-interim relief was granted in terms of paragraph 26 (B) of the petition whereby the impugned order was stayed.

6. During the pendency of this petition, respondent Nos.2.1 to 2.6 have filed Civil Application No.14000 of 2008 for vacation of the ad-interim relief granted by this Court on 15.06.2007 and thereafter continued till this date.

7. Heard Mr. A. J. Patel with Mr. S.P. Majmudar, learned advocates appearing for the petitioners and Mr. J.S. Yadav, learned advocate appearing for the private respondents and Ms. Trusha Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the State Government authorities.

8. It is the case of the petitioners in both these petitions that land bearing Block No. 342-B admeasuring Hectares 01.17.00 of village Adalaj, Tal. & Dist. Gandhinagar is of the ownership of the father of the petitioners. The said land was then sold to the respondent No.2 i.e. Kantibhai Babaldas Prajapati by way of registered Sale Deed dated 04.04.1979 for a consideration of Rs.12,000/-. The entry of the same was posted in the revenue records vide Entry No.6696 dated 24.12.1981. The said sale transaction was taken into suo-motu proceedings by the learned Deputy Collector under the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, and thereby case was registered being Case No.288 of 1982 holding therein that the said transaction was in violation of the Section 9 (1) of the Fragmentation Act and, therefore, the said transaction was void. The Deputy Collector vide his order dated 26.08.1987 passed in Fragmentation Case No.288 of 1982 has further directed to restore the original position i.e. it was directed to hand over the possession of the land in question to the original landlord i.e. present petitioners. A fine of Rs.50/- was also imposed upon the transferors of the said land. Pursuant to the said order, original position was restored and thereby Entry No.3350 was passed on 29.02.1988 cancelling Entry No.6696 dated 14.12.1981 by the Competent Authority. A public notice was also issued to this effect before issuing Title Clearance Certificate by the advocate in favour of the petitioners on 02.02.2006.

9. It is also the case of the petitioners that after obtaining the title clearance certificate, the petitioners applied for N.A. Permission from the competent authority and the same was granted by the competent authority vide order dated 22.11.2006. The entry in relation to the said N.A. Permission was also posted in the revenue records vide Entry No.10703 dated 03.01.2007. On the basis of N.A. Permission, the proposed development plan was submitted before Gandhinagar Urban Development Authority (GUDA) for its approval and the said plans were sanctioned on 27.11.2006. On the basis of this sanctioned deve