1. By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the State of Gujarat along with the Mamlatdar, Upleta, District: Rajkot call in question the legality and validity of the order dated 10th April 2013 passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, by which the Tribunal partly allowed the revision application filed by the respondents herein and remanded the matter to the Mamlatdar and A.L.T. for fresh consideration of the issue in question.

2. The facts giving rise to this application may be summarised as under:

2.1 The respondents are the legal heirs of one Harishchandrasinh Dansinh. The Amended Act, 1972 (Gujarat Act No.2 of 1972) of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 came into force with effect from 1st April 1976.

2.2 On 29th June 1976, Shri Harishchandrasinh Dansinh Vala filled up the form No.2 along with an affidavit in accordance with Section 10 of the Ceiling Act, and thereby declared the various parcels of lands in his holding situated in the districts of Rajkot and Jamnagar respectively. The lands held by Shri Harishchandrasinh Dansinh were ancestral.

2.3 On 5th September 1977, the Revenue Department, vide order dated 9th December 1976, passed under Section 14 of the Act, directed the Mamlatdar of the Upleta Taluka to conduct the ceiling case.

2.4 The proceedings, ultimately, came to be registered as the Ceiling Case No.42 of 1976 with the Mamlatdar and A.L.T., Upleta, Rajkot. Shri Harishchandrasinh Dansinh was served with the notices and the matter was heard. The statements of Talati-cum-Mantri and the other revenue officers were recorded and various other documentary evidence produced by the parties were taken on record.

2.5 On 4th October 1980 i.e. during the pendency of the proceedings before the Mamlatar and A.L.T., Upleta, Shri Harishchandrasinh Dansinh passed away.

2.6 The Mamlatdar and A.L.T., Upleta, vide his order dated 28th January 1984, declared:

(1) that on the date when the Act came into force i.e. 1st April 1976, Shri Harishchandrasinh Dansinh had two major sons namely Shivrajsinh Harishchanrasinh (D.O.B. 28th January 1941) and Indrajitsinh Harishchandrasinh (D.O.B. 15th June 1947). Therefore, the family members of the deceased Harishchandra Dansinh were entitled to three units each.

(2) that out of the total holding of Harishchandra Dansinh, the land admeasuring 1050 Acres were declared as surplus. The respondents were held entitled to hold the lands admeasuring Acres 130.20 Gunthas.

2.7 It appears that the respondents filed an appeal before the Deputy Collector, Gondal, District: Rajkot challenging the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Upleta.

2.8 On 23rd February 1984, the Mamlatdar, Upleta forwarded all the papers to the Deputy Collector, Gondal, Rajkot.

2.9 On 30th June 1984, the Deputy Collector, Gondal issued notices upon the respondents, and after considering their reply as well as the record of the case, affirmed the order of the Mamlatdar and A.L.T., Upleta.

2.10 The respondents, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Gondal preferred a revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, which came to be registered as the Revision Case No.TEN/BR/2/85. Before the Tribunal, two things were highlighted by the respondents:

(1) Vidi land is not to be treated as an agricultural and therefore, the same was wrongly considered in the holding under the Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act.

(2) The original holder namely Harishchandrasinh Dansinh had passed away on 4th October 1980 and apart from the two major sons named above, he also left behind two daughters namely Kaushyakumari (D.O.B. Year 1944) and Premilakumari.

2.11 It was argued before the Tribunal that in view of the amended Hindu Succession Act, 1956 i.e. the Amended Act, 2005, the daughters being treated as the coparceners were entitled to two units each as the Class I heirs.

2.1