Revisionary powers must be exercised within a reasonable timeframe; actions taken after significant delays are deemed unjustifiable, preserving the validity of transactions during that period.

JUDGMENT :

ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.

1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“12A) Your Lordships may be pleased to admit this petition.

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction by quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 09/02/2016 Passed by the Respondent No.1 in Revision Application No.MVV/GHARKHED/SNR/7/2012 preferred by the present petitioner against order dated 21/02/2012 passed by the Respondent No.2 the District Collector, Surendranagar in GHARKHED ORDI. APPEAL CASE NO. 03/2011-12.

(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the execution, operation and implementation of the order dated 09/02/2016 at annexure A passed by Respondent No. 1 in Revision Application No. MVV/GHARKHED/SNR/7/2012 preferred by the present petitioner against order dated 21/02/2012 passed by the Respondent No.2 the District Collector, Surendranagar in GHARKHED ORDI. APPEAL CASE ΝΟ. 03/2011-12.

(D) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to direct the Mamlatdar Chotila (E-Dhara) to delete the name of the Respondent no.3 from the revenue record and enter name of present petitioner in to the same.

(E) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition Your Lordships may be pleased to restrain the Respondent No.3 to sale the land in question.”

2. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the father of the petitioner was an agriculturist as he was holding agricultural land bearing Survey No.82 of Village Rajawad, Taluka Chotila, District Surendranagar. That the name of the petitioner is also included in the revenue records by entries in respect of the said land. That thereafter the petitioner purchased agricultural land bearing Survey No.112 at Village Nawa, Taluka Chotila, District Surendranagar by way of registered sale deed dated 11.02.1980. Mutation entry No.498 came to be recorded in Village Form No.6. The said entry also came to be certified on 23.04.1980 by the competent authority. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that after about 31 years, the Mamlatdar, Surendranagar by proposal dated 21.10.2010 to the Dy. Collector, Surendranagar stated that the sale transaction dated 11.02.1980 was in violation of Section 54 of the Saurashtra Gharkhed Tenancy Settlement And Agricultural Lands Ordinance, 1949 [“Ordinance of 1949” for short] as the petitioner was a non-agriculturist. Based on the proposal, the Dy. Collector, Surendranagar initiated proceedings being Gharkhed Case No.67 of 2010. By order dated 30.04.2011 passed by the Dy. Collector, Surendranagar, the petitioner was ordered to be summarily evicted from the land in question. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Gharkhed Appeal No.3 of 2011-2012 challenging the order dated 30.04.2011 passed by the Dy. Collector, Surendranagar. The Collector, Surendranagar by order dated 21.02.2012 was pleased to confirm the order passed by the Dy. Collector, Surendranagar upholding the eviction of the petitioner. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Revision Application No.MVV/GHARKHED/SNR/7/2012 before the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department. By the impugned order dated 09.02.2016, the Special Secretary (Appeals), Re