Encroachers cannot claim regularization of land as a matter of right; discretion lies with the Collector to evaluate hardship based on existing land holdings.

JUDGMENT :

1. RULE. Learned AGP Mr. Nikunj Kanara waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State.

2. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside the order dated 06.02.2014 passed by the Collector, Banaskantha in N.K./JAMAN/3/Vashi.no.7748 to 7753 as well as the order dated 18.06.2016 passed by the Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals) in Revision Application No. MVV/JAMAN/BANAS/25 of 2014 confirming the order passed by the Collector, Banaskantha and rejecting the revision application of the petitioner for regularization of encroachment of the land in question.

3. Heard learned advocate Mr. S. P. Majmudar with learned advocate Mr. Shagun Choksi for the petitioner and learned AGP Mr. Nikunj Kanara for the respondent – State.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that the petitioner is in possession in respect of land bearing Survey No. 267 paiki, Taluka: Danta, District : Banaskantha admeasuring 1 acre 20 gunthas and the said land is located on the boundary between village : Panjarpur, Village: Ganchherani and Village: Hedo. The said land is encroached upon by the petitioner and the petitioner is the original owner of the land at Survey Nos. 41 and 42 of Village: Hedo which are adjoining to the land in question.

4.1. It is the case of the petitioner that the land in question originally belonged to Maharaj Madhusudansinhji and thereafter, the same was vested into Gram Panchayat, Panjarpur and when the petitioner was asked to pay the penalty for a period of 1968 – 1969 to 1993-1994 by the Gram Panchayat, the same was paid by the present petitioner.

4.2. According to the petitioner, the Government has vide Government Resolution dated 08.01.1980 by the Revenue Department has framed a policy for regularization of encroachment on the government land and therefore, pursuant to the aforesaid policy introduced vide Government Resolution dated 08.01.1980, the petitioner applied for regularization of his encroachment over the subject land but the said application was rejected vide order dated 30.06.2000. The petitioner challenged the said order dated 30.06.2000 passed by the Collector, Banaskantha by way of Revision Application No. MVV/JAMAN/61/2000 before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department and Special Secretary, Revenue Department vide order dated 12.07.2001 partly allowed the revision application and remanded back the matter to the learned Collector. Upon remand, learned Collector vide order dated 17.05.2007 once again rejected the application of the petitioner for regularization which was again challenged by the petitioner before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 17.05.2007 , the petitioner preferred revision application before the Special Secretary, Revenue Department being Revision Application No. MVV/JAMAN/BANAS/43/2007. The said revision application was partly allowed vide order dated 23.11.2013 and again the same was remanded back to the Collector, Banaskantha. While remanding the matter back, the Special Secretary, Revenue Department observed that the Government Resolution dated 08.01.1980 be considered by learned Collector while disposing of the application of the petitioner.

4.3. Pursuant to the aforesaid remand, when the proceedings were decided by the Collector, Banaskantha, he once again vide order dated 06.02.2014 rejected the application of the petitioner and hence, being aggrieved by the rejection of the application for regularization even after second remand, vide order dated 06.02.2014 the petitioner challenged the same before Special Secretary, Revenue Department by preferring Revision Application No. MVV/JAMAN/BANAS/25/2014. However, initially after granting the stay in favour of the petitioner once again by order dated 18.06.2014, the Special Secretary, Revenue Department rejected the revision application of the petitioner and hence, being aggrieved by and feeling dissatisfied with the or