A tenant’s claim to agricultural land must be supported by substantial evidence; mere assertions without proof do not establish tenancy rights.

JUDGMENT :

SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ.

1. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record. This Intra-court appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.11.2006 passed by the learned Single Judge in dismissing the writ petition upholding the order passed by the revenue tribunal on the ground that the Tribunal has not committed any jurisdictional error in exercise of the jurisdiction, which may call for interference by this Court in exercise of the power under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

2. This case presents a chequered history of the purchases of the lands in question namely land bearing Survey Nos. 709, 709/1 and 710, in Village Pilvai, Taluka Vijapur, District Mehsana. The petitioners claimed to have purchased the lands in question vide registered sale deed dated 20.11.1973 from the original landlord after payment of requisite premium for conversion of the land in question from new tenure to old tenure. It is submitted that the respondent No.1, Mr.Hargovanbhai Chhaganlal Patel, claiming to be the tenant of the lands in question filed an application under Sections 70(b), 29, 32G and 32(1)(p) of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (in short, “the Tenancy Act’ 1948”) before the Mamlatdar and ALT, Vijapur. The said application was registered as Tenancy Case No. 32 of 1976 and vide order dated 20.07.1976, giving benefit of Section 70(b), the application of respondent No.1 was allowed declaring him to be the tenant of the lands in question, simultaneously, ordering for removal of the petitioners from the lands in question under the provisions of Section 86 of the Tenancy Act’ 1948.

3. The original landlords, who had already sold the lands in question to the original petitioners herein filed an appeal against the order dated 20.07.1976, as Tenancy Appeal No.271 of 1976 before the Deputy Collector, who had confirmed the order passed by the Mamlatdar while dismissing the appeal vide order dated 30.06.1977. Simultaneously, the petitioners also filed a revision application before the Deputy Collector challenging the order dated 20.07.1976, which was also dismissed by a separate order of the same date, i.e. 20.07.1976. Two sets of revisions were then filed, one by the petitioner and another by the original landlord bearing Revision Nos.787 of 1977 and 788 of 1977; respectively before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. Both the Revisions were allowed vide order dated 06.07.1978 and while setting aside the orders of the Mamlatdar and Deputy Collector, the matter was remanded back to the Mamlatdar and ALT reserving liberty to the parties to lead fresh evidence, if they desire, with the direction to decide the matter afresh as indicated therein.

4. Upon remand, the Mamlatdar and ALT registered a Tenancy Case No.223 of 1978 and by order dated 25.11.1978 had declared that the original applicant, namely Hargovandas Chhaganlal Patel was entitled to purchase the lands in question under the Tenancy Act’ 1948 as on date, i.e. 01.04.1957, and Section 84 proceedings for removal of the possession of the petitioners was ordered. An appeal before the Collector, Mehsana was filed against the said order, who had rejected the same vide order dated 27.03.1979 on the ground of inherent lack of ju