JUDGMENT :

VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.

1. Heard Mr. Prateek S. Bhatia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners and Ms. Dharitiri Y. Pancholi, learned AGP appearing for the respondents.

2. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Pancholi, learned AGP waives service of rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State.

3. By way of the present petition, the petitioners herein prays for the following reliefs:

“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, to quash and set aside the Orders dated 13.06.2024 and 05.07.2025 passed in NA Application No.31902202402404 and 319092202504082 (Annexure-A);

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Collector to accept the charges for NA permission for land situated at Revenue Survey No.1181 situated at Village-Itola, Taluka Vadodara Vadodara in the interest of justice and equity;

(C) Grant such other and further relief(s) as may be deemed fit in the interest of justice and equity.”

4. By way of the present petition, the petitioner herein has challenged the impugned orders dated 13.06.2024 and 05.07.2025 passed by respondent No. 2 – Collector, Vadodara, whereby the petitioner’s application for obtaining Non-Agricultural (NA) permission in relation to land bearing Revenue Survey No. 1181 situated at Village – Itola, Taluka – Vadodara, District – Vadodara came to be rejected. The order dated 13.06.2024 passed in NA Application No. 31902202402404 is rejected on the ground that there is anomaly in the name of the petitioner No.1 in 7/12 record, Registration No. 7333 and in the Aadhar Card of the petitioner No.1. In view thereof, the application was consigned to file. Thereafter, the petitioner No. 1 changed his name and duly gazetted the same. The copy of the gazette is produced at page No. 25 which indicates that on 08.02.2024, the appropriate change was made wherein the name of the petitioner No. 1 is changed from “Gupta Amrish Shirishchandra” to “Patel Amrish Shirishchandra”. In view of the aforesaid gazette notification, the petitioner No.1 reapplied for grant of NA which came to be rejected on the ground that the earlier order dated 13.06.2024 was required to be challenged by way of an Appeal by order dated 05.07.2025. The aforesaid has given rise to the filing of the present petition.

5. Mr. Bhatia, learned advocate appearing for the petitioners submits that in the earlier application, the first part of the order rejects the petitioner’s application and subsequently consigns the petitioner’s application to file. In view thereof, the petitioner never approached the appellate authority. In the interregnum period, the petitioner’s name in view of the gazette notification dated 08.02.2024 in change of name of the petitioner from “Gupta Amrish Sirishchandra” to “Patel Amrish Sirishchandra” (Serial No. 162) duly produced at page No. 25. The petitioner preferred a fresh application and the said application is also rejected by order dated 05.07.2025 on an erroneous ground that no appeal is preferred rather than taking into consideration the documents that were produced on record by the petitioner.

6. Ms. Pancholi, learned AGP is not in a position to controvert the factual position.

7. Having heard learned advocates for the respective parties, it is not in dispute that the change in name of the petitioner No. 1 is duly gazetted and in view thereof, if the petitioner were to approach the respondent authority by filing a fresh petition placing on record all the relevant documents as required under Section 65 of the Code, the same be considered by the respondent No. 2 in accordance with the powers as provided under Section 65 of the Code and taking into consideration the ratio laid down in the case of Tusharbhai Harjibhai Ghelani and Anr. v/s. State of Gujarat and Ors. reported in 2019 (4) GLR 2578 and duly c