IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is that the disposal of land must adhere to the prescribed procedures, and the appropriate authority has the jurisdiction to suspend resolutions that do not comply with the law.

ORDER :

SUNITA AGARWAL, J.

The instant Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.03.2011 passed by the learned single Judge in dismissing the writ petition challenging the order dated 22.05.2009 passed by the Secretary, Urban Housing and Urban Development Department, State of Gujarat in Appeal No. 31 of 2008, confirming the order passed by the Collector, Bhavnagar dated 29.05.2008.

2. It is the case of the appellant-the original petitioner herein that the land bearing Survey No. 270/1 paiki admeasuring 9600 sq.yards was granted to the petitioner trust by Shihor Nagar Panchayat vide Resolution dated 05.03.1992 at the rate of Rs. 1 per sq.yard, on the terms and conditions stipulated in the said Resolution. The said disposal of the land by Shihor Nagar Panchayat was found to be in breach of Section 98(1) of the Gujarat Panchayat Act, 1961 on the premise that the land-in-question was disposed of without prior permission of the District Development Officer, Bhavnagar.

3. Vide order dated 23.12.1992, the District Development Officer, Bhavnagar in exercise of powers under Section 294(4) of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, 1961 suspended the aforesaid resolution of the general body of the Shihor Nagar Panchayat.

4. The aggrieved petitioner herein preferred Revision before the Additional Development Commissioner, State of Gujarat under Section 305 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act, which was dismissed vide order dated 1.5.1993. The Special Civil Application No. 6819 of 1993 was filed by the petitioner trust challenging the aforesaid two orders, which was allowed vide judgment and order dated 21.12.2004. The matter was remanded to the District Development Officer to pass fresh order in exercise of powers under Section 291 of the Gujarat Panchayats Act.

5. In the meantime, Shihor Nagar Panchayat was converted into Nagarpalika and thus, the Gujarat Municipalities Act were made applicable to it. The District Development Officer consequentially referred the matter to the Collector, Bhavnagar, who in turn rejected the matter with the observation that as per the directions of this Court, the District Development Officer was required to decide the case after remand. The District Development Officer, Bhavnagar moved a Civil Application No. 736 of 2005 in the above noted Special Civil Application for modification/clarification of the order passed by this court. Vide order dated 11.08.2005, this Court had directed to dispose of the case on remand under the provisions of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, 1993. The matter was, therefore, heard by the District Collector and the Collector, Bhavnagar vide order dated 29.05.2008 in exercise of powers under Section 258 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act has permanently stayed/suspended the resolution of the general body Shihor Nagar Panchayat dated 5.3.1992 and further directed to restore the position which was prevailing prior to the passing of the said resolution. It is noted by the learned single Judge that the Secretary, Bhavnagar passed the order dated 29.05.2008 after giving fullest opportunity to the petitioner.

6. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred the Special Civil Application No. 8084 of 2009 challenging the order dated 29.05.2008 passed by the Collector, Bhavnagar which was later withdrawn on the terms to approach the State Government against the order by preferring revision under Section 264 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act. The Revision preferred by the petitioner under Section 264 of the Municipalities Act had been dismissed by the Revisional Authority vide order dated 22.05.2009.

7. The writ petition, out of which the instant Appeal has arisen, was directed against the orders dated 29.05.2008 passed by the Collector, Bhavnagar and dated 22.05.2009 passed by the Revisional Authority under Section Sections 258 and 264 of the Gujarat Municipalities Act, respectively. As noted by the learned single Judge, the plea of jurisdiction of the Collector to pass the order invoking the jurisdiction und