Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
DIVYESH A.JOSHI
Koli Parshottambhai Narsinhbhai – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat Thro Secretary (Appeals) – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DIVYESH A. JOSHI, J.
1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicants have called in question the legality and validity of the order dated 30.05.2012 passed by the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, Polytechnic, Ahmedabad in Revision Application No.MVV/JMN/SNR 76-2008.
2. Facts, in brief, giving rise to the filing of the present application may be summarized as under;
2.1 On 30.01.1968, the land bearing Survey No.59/paiki/1 Moje Ghanshyampur, Taluka: Limbdi, District: Surendranagar was recorded in the name of one Raja Bechar as the measurement register was made applicable in the village: Ghanshyampur.
2.2 On 20.09.1991, the names of legal heirs and representatives of Raja Bechar were recorded in the revenue record upon the sad demise of Raja Bechar.
2.3 On 19.03.1990, the writ applicants purchased the land bearing Survey No.59/paiki/1 Moje Ghanshyampur, Taluka: Limbdi, District: Surendranagar admeasuring 8 Acre 32 Gunthas from the heirs and legal representatives of Raja Bechar vide registered sale deed dated 19.03.1990.
2.4 On 21.09.1991, pursuant to the aforesaid sale transaction, an entry being Mutation Entry No.650
The delay of 11 years in exercising suo motu powers renders such actions arbitrary, violating established legal rights under registered sale deeds.
Authority must exercise revisional powers within a reasonable time to ensure legal rights are not unjustly compromised.
Revisional powers in land disputes must be exercised within a reasonable time; otherwise, established agricultural rights cannot be annulled.
Suo motu revisional powers must be exercised within a reasonable period; delays result in the action being considered arbitrary and may infringe on established rights.
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.
Point of law: Since notice has been issued after 78 years, it is completely beyond the period of limitation and, therefore, the notice itself would be a nullity and without any jurisdiction. When the....
The power to initiate proceedings under Section 9 of the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947 is subject to the principles of natural justice and the requirement....
Point of Law : where the legislature does not provide for any length of time within which the power of revision is to be exercised by the authority, suo motu or otherwise, it is plain that exercise o....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
