Point in Issue :
Can petitioner who himself sold the land by registered sale deed to father of respondent can challenge the mutation in the name of purchaser.

M.R. Shah, J.—By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner - seller of the land in question has prayed for appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 08.07.2010 passed by the Revisional Authority i.e. Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat in Revision Application No. 7/2010 by which the Revisional Authority has refused to grant stay of the order passed by the Collector, Mehsana dated 29.12.2009 in R.T.S. Appeal No. 153/2009.

2. At the outset it is required to be noted that this Court is conscious of the fact that the present petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Revisional Authority in not granting stay during the pendency of the Revision Application. However, despite the fact that at the initial stage, he was pointed out that Revision Application is still pending, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has made submission on merits for more than 30 minutes and has addressed the Court on merits and therefore, this Court is constrained to consider the case on merits as the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has invited the order on merits.

3. The facts leading to the present Special Civil Application in nut-shell are as under:

Petitioner has sold the land in question in favour of Respondent No. 3 by registered sale deed dated 31.03.2003. It appears that there was a family dispute between the petitioner and his father Fakirbhai Chhaganbhai Vaghri and the petitioner had filed Regular Civil Suit No. 8/1997 before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Mehsana for declaration and injunction. That the learned trial Court granted injunction application in favour of the petitioner - original plaintiff and the said suit came to be decreed by the learned trial Court by judgment and order dated 08.01.2007 passed by the learned trial Court. That being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2007, the original defendant - father of the petitioner, Fakirbhai Chhaganbhai Vaghri preferred First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the Additional District Judge, Mehsana which came to be dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment and order dated 25.01.2008 and even the Second Appeal against the judgment and order passed by the learned Appellate Court confirming the decree passed by learned trial Court came to be dismissed vide order dated 28.02.2008. That as stated above, prior thereto, petitioner sold the land in question vide registered sale deed dated 31.03.2003 and Respondent No. 3 tried to mutate his name in the revenue record on the basis of the aforesaid registered sale deed and in the meantime father of the petitioner had instituted one Special Suit No. 27/2005 challenging the registered sale deed which was executed by the petitioner in favour of Respondent No. 3. However, in view of the pendency of the Civil Suit No. 8/1997, name of Respondent No. 3 was not mutated in the revenue record. That after the judgment and decree dated 08.01.2007 passed by the learned trial Court in Regular Civil Suit No. 8/1997, Respondent No. 3 again approached the revenue authority for mutating his name in the revenue record. However, father of Respondent No. 3 expired on 13.02.2008 and ultimately, in view of the registered sale deed executed in favour of the father of Respondent No. 3, necessary entry was made in the revenue record on the basis of registered sale deed dated 31.03.2003. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the mutation entry No. 7712, petitioner preferred Appeal before the Deputy Collector under Rule 108(5) of the Gujarat Land Revenue Rules being Appeal No. 31/2009 and the Deputy Collector, Mehsana allowed the said Appeal by quashing and setting aside mutation entry No. 7712. That being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Mehsana dated 29.08.2009 in Appeal No. 31/2