The importance of justifying delays in approaching authorities and the significance of concurrent findings of facts in land dispute cases.

ORDER :

By this petition, the petitioners, are challenging the order passed by the learned Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned Secretary’) dated 29.7.2016 whereby, the order passed by the Collector, Banaskantha, confirming the order of the Assistant Collector, Tharad of not interfering with the entry no.109 of the year 1961 and entry no.134 of the year 1966, has been confirmed.

2. The factual matrix, as can be culled out from the petition memo is that the petitioners, are the heirs of Kumbhar Megha Mula, who was granted land by the Manager of Tharad State. According to the petitioners, as per the old revenue record, the subject land was designated as “kumbharvalu” and was in the name of Kumbhar Megha Mula, the ancestor of the petitioners.

2.1 As per the endorsement dated 6.9.1954, in the revenue record, namely, vagdapatrak, and as per the order dated 16.6.1943 passed by the Manager of Sabarkantha as well as the order dated 4.9.1944 passed by the Manager of Tharad State, kumbhar was given vethiyu farm.

2.2. According to the petitioners, from the khetvar patrak prepared in the year 1956, the subject land, is shown in the name of Kumbhar Megha Mula; however, according to the petitioners, intentionally and by committing mischief, the name of State Government, has been recorded. In the year 1954, at the time of promulgation, new revenue revenue record was prepared, including village form no.6 by gathering the details; despite there being ownership right available of the ancestor of the petitioners, the revenue officers, erroneously recorded that before 50 years, the subject land was given to Patel Savdas Mansang on condition to pay some amount. According to the petitioners, to the reasons best known to it, the subject land was given a new survey number and Patel Savdas Mansang was shown as occupier and after correcting the revenue record, the land, has been shown as government land vide entry nos.109 and 134.

2.3. It is the case of the petitioners that the authorities, have erroneously recorded entry nos.109 and 134 and shown the subject land of the ownership of the ancestor of the petitioners as a government land. No notice was served, no proceedings have been initiated, and no orders are passed. In absence thereof, entry nos.109 and 134, could not have been recorded.

2.4. The petitioners being illiterate innocent villagers, preferred an appeal before the Assistant Collector, with a request to quash and set aside the entry no.109 dated 8.6.1961 as well as entry no.134 dated 2.2.1969. The Assistant Collector, rejected the appeal of the petitioners on the ground that entry no.109 has been posted in the year 1961 and entry no.134, has been posted in the year 1966 and therefore, there is a delay of almost 48 years in filing the appeal and hence, cannot be entertained.

2.5. Being aggrieved, the petitioners, preferred a revision application before the Collector who, vide order dated 17.12.2013, rejected the same and confirmed the order of the Assistant Collector dated 30.9.2010. The learned Secretary in revision, confirmed the order of the Collector dated 17.12.2013 on the ground that the proceedings, after the delay of 48 years, cannot be entertained as, the law helps the vigilant and hence, the present writ petition with the aforementioned prayers.

3. Mr Rakesh R. Patel, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the subject land, was granted in favour of grandfather of the petitioners rightfully by the erstwhile government and the same, was running in his name. The said factum, is strengthened by the measurement field-book wherein, the name of grandfather – Kumbhar Megha Mula, is shown. It is submitted that, however, in the khetvar patrak prepared in the year 1956, to be precise on 21.9.1956, along with the name of grandfather, the name of State Government, was also entered. It is submitted that such endorsement in the khetvar patrak of the year 1956, is erroneously made and