JUDGMENT :

ASHUTOSH J. SHASTRI, J.

1. By way of this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, appellant-original petitioner has assailed the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 09.02.2018 by virtue of which petition was summarily dismissed.

2. The facts in brief are that original petitioner is the owner of land bearing Survey No. 147 (old survey no. 434) admeasuring 0-23-78 situated at Village Shiyavada, Taluka: Sanand, District Ahmedabad and is carrying on agricultural activities for her livelihood. This land in question was purchased from its previous owner named as Arjanbhai Revabhai vide sale deed dated 15.04.2013 and by virtue of said registered sale deed, the name of the petitioner has also been mutated and effect was given in the revenue records. It is the case of the appellant - petitioner that respondent no. 2 is the resident of village Shiyavada, has nothing to do with petitioner remotely with the land in question and is involved in activity of creating hurdles, by submitting an application on 07.12.2015 to the Hon’ble Chief Minister of Gujarat he had made a request to inquire about the construction carried out over the land and also to inquire about the revenue records. Since application was submitted to the Hon’ble Chief Minister through proper channel, same was forwarded to the Section Officer and then to the Collector, Ahmedabad and Collector in turn was pleased to dispose of the same. However, again respondent no. 2 made yet another application on 09.03.2016 reiterating the fact and then submitted that petitioner made construction of 49 shops without prior permission of competent authority and as such, requested the authorities to initiate action against petitioner under the provisions of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code.

2.1. In response to this, Deputy Collector, Sanand investigated and passed an order on 15.02.2017 whereby, it was concluded that land has been used for non agricultural and commercial purposes though same was a new tenure and undivided type of land, without prior permission of the competent authority and as such ordered for such land being vested with the Government without encumbrances. This order was carried in appeal before the Collector, who vide order dated 23.08.2017 was pleased to confirm the order of Deputy Collector and dismissed the appeal against which a further appeal came to be filed by the petitioner before the Revenue Secretary, who disposed of revision/appeal vide order dated 06.01.2018 and dismissed the same. It was submitted by the petitioner that construction of 49 shops were never concealed at any point of time from revenue authorities, but it is only on account of personal vendetta, respondent no. 2 is out to destroy and ruin the petitioner and her livelihood a complaint has been lodged. It was the case of petitioner that similarly placed persons have also filed Special Civil Application 29374 of 2007 which was disposed of with a liberty to petitioner therein to approach the Collector seeking regularization of construction on payment of any prevalent price or premium as the case may be. The said petition was disposed of by order dated 08.07.2008 vide Annexure-E.

2.2. Since the petitioner has never suppressed anything from the revenue authorities and on the contrary petitioner being inclined to seek regularization on payment of fine or premium as the case may be, has approached this Court by way of petition being Special Civil Application 2353 of 2018 with a prayer to direct the respondent Collector to accept the application of petitioner and to consider the same by regularizing the construction which has been put up over the land in question on payment of premium/fine at the prevalent price and within stipulated period in consonance with the direction earlier issued by this Court in Special Civil Application 29374 of 2007.

2.3. This petition came up for consideration before the learned Single Judge on 09.02.2018 and learned Single Judge was pleased to summ