Important Point—Collector is not to go into question of title of land.

C.L. Soni, J.

Following are the prayers made in para 8 of the present petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India:

"8(A) to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 19.02.2015 passed by the District Collector, Surat and be further pleased to declare that NA permission deemed to have been granted in respect of the land bearing Revenue Survey No.179 and 180 Block No.218/3 ad measuring 69796 sq.mtrs. Of village Kadodara, Taluka Palsana, District Surat for residential purpose.

(B) Alternatively, to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the District Collector, Surat to grant the application dated 05.09.2014 by accepting the charges for NA permission for residential purpose in respect of the land bearing Revenue Survey No.179 and 180 Block No.218/3 ad measuring 69796 sq.mtrs. Of village Kadodara, Taluka Palsana, District Surat.

(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition,Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the District Collector, Surat to reconsider the application of the petitioner dated 05.09.2014 for NA Permission in respect of the land bearing Revenue Survey No.179 and 180 Block No.218/3 ad measuring 68796 sq.mtrs. Of village Kadodara, Taluka Palsana, District Surat for residential purpose.

(D) to pass such other and further orders as may be expedient and necessary in the circumstances of the case. "

2. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner had applied for NA Permission under section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 ("the Code") to respondent No.2 for the land bearing Survey No.179 and 180 Block No.218-3 ad measuring 69796 square meters. However, such application was ordered to be filed (disposed of) by respondent No.2 on the ground that it was necessary to verify from the office of the Mamlatdar as to whether any appeal or revision was preferred against the judgment and decree passed in Regular Civil Suit No. 88 of 2003 by the Civil Court on 6.11.2009. The petitioner has averred in the petition that his grand-father was the owner of the land in question. However, after the death of his grand father, taking undue advantage of his absence, the land was mutated in the revenue record in the name of the trust. The petitioner, therefore, filed the above said civil suit wherein the Joint Charity Commissioner was also a party. The suit was for declaration and permanent injunction. It is the further case of the petitioner that in such suit, settlement was arrived at between the parties and as per the settlement, the petitioner is declared to be the owner and in possession of the land bearing Block No.218-A ad measuring 10 Hector 81 Are and 91 square meters situated at village Kadodara,Taluka Palsana, District Surat. The petitioner has averred that from the land of 10 Hector, 81 Are and 91 square meters, the land ad measuring 3 Hector, 62 Are and 49 square meters (35249 square meters) was acquired by the Government for public purpose and, thereafter by order dated 6.2.2010, the Deputy Collector passed order for making necessary changes in the revenue record. The case of the petitioner is that though in the revenue record, the petitioner is shown owning the land ad measuring 69796 square meters, the Collector has ordered to file/dispose of his application for NA Permission to verify whether any appeal or revision is preferred against the order/decree passed by the Civil Court.

3. The petition is opposed by filing affidavit in reply on behalf of respondent No.2 mainly stating that the land was originally recorded in the revenue record as "Gam Samast Haripura" and in respect of such land, the petitioner got order in his favour from the civil court on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties in the civil suit wherein the State Government was not joined as party. It is further stated that