On earlier occasion, i.e. on 8-11-2011 / 10-11-2011 this Court had passed following orders:

1. Heard learned advocates for the parties.

2. Learned counsels for the parties have in fact advanced submissions at length and they have agreed for final disposal of the matter at the admission stage. Hence, Rule. Ms. Pathak,learned AGP, Mr. Dhaval D. Vyas and Ms. Anushree Kapadia, waives service of Rule on behalf of respective respondents.

3. The petitioners, opponents in the Appeal being Appeal No. 82/2010-2011 before the District Collector, Jamnagar in respect of the subject matter of lands mentioned therein, have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order passed by the District Collector along with the Appeal No. 82 of 2010-11 filed by present respondent nos. 5/1 to 5/4, whereunder, the District Collector revoked and cancelled the order dated 8.3.2011 granting N.A. Permission in favour of the petitioners as the litigations in form of civil suit mentioned in the order are pending in the Civil Court, holding that the title to the land is not clear. The said order was required to be revoked.

4. Facts in brief leading to file this petition, as could be culled out from the memo of petition deserve to be set out as under:

1. The lands in question i.e. land bearing Survey Nos. 665/a, 665/2, 43/1 and 43/2 of village: Dwarka, District: Jamnagar belonged to one Kanabhai Varsang Nagesh. After demise of Kanabhai V. Nagesh, entry No. 334 came to be mutated to that effect. The said entry indicated the demise of Surabhai Kanabhai Nagesh and in that entry, present respondent no.5/1 and other appellants name were not mentioned at all. After the demise of Surabhai Kanabhai Nagesh, the lands in question devolve upon his heirs i.e. respondent nos. 4.1 to 4.8 and entry No. 1315 dated 3.3.1986 was made in favour of Surabhai Kanabhai Nagesh. On the same day, on account of partition between co-owners, mutation entry No. 1316 was made. The said mutation was carried out after due notice under Section 135D of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879 and the notice was served upon Lakhman Kana i.e. father of the contesting appellants before the Collector. In the year 1999, to be more precise on 21.10.1999, Nagesh Harghod Lakhman filed Revision Application No. 3 of 1999-2000 before the District Collector, Jamnagar claiming that he has right in the lands in question and therefore, his name also be entered in the revenue record. On 18.9.1999, an order was passed by District Collector to cancel and mutation entry No. 244, 334, 1315 and 1316 and the Collector further directed that fresh entry should be made in this regard after verifying all the heirs of Laxman Kana. Thereafter, entry No. 1844 came to be mutated and names of heirs of Laxman Kana were also entered along with names of heirs of Sura Kana. Against said order, heirs of Sura Kana filed Revision Application before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department being Revision Application No. 4 of 2000 and 9 of 2002 and as per order dated 16.7.2008, the Revision Applications came to be allowed and entry No. 1844 was suspended. However, while suspending the entry, it was observed in the order that the revenue authorities cannot decide the question of title of a property and the party should approach the Civil Court for the same and result of the civil court would be governing the title. The said order of Revenue Secretary dated 16.7.2008 was subject matter of challenge by the heirs of Laxman Kana in Special Civil Application No. 27 of 2009, which came to be dismissed vide order dated 1.7.2009. The said order dated 1.7.2009 was not assailed in any other proceedings like Letters Patent Appeal and therefore, it is submitted by the petitioners that the resultant effect would be that mutation entry Nos. 1315 and 1316 would revive.

2. Present petitioners have purchased the lands in question by way of registered sale deed dated 28.7.2009, to which, mutation entry No. 2561 w