Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(GUJ) 27951
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ, MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
GANESH SAGAR INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. – Respondent
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 205 of 2024
MR UTKARSH SHARMA, ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The court emphasized that administrative powers must be exercised within a reasonable time frame, and delays can render subsequent orders illegal.
Headnote:(A) Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 - Section 197 - Intra Court appeal against dismissal of writ petition challenging orders of Collector and Deputy Collector regarding land tenure - The learned Single Judge held that the powers exercised to quash earlier orders after a significant delay were illegal and beyond reasonable time limits. (Paras 1, 11, 16)
(B) Jurisdiction - The inquiry conducted by the Mamlatdar was deemed valid as it was based on the absence of supporting evidence for the New tenure status of the land. (Paras 12, 14)
Facts of the case:
The appeal arose from a challenge to the legality of orders regarding land tenure, where the original tenure holder claimed no notice was given before the vesting of land in the State. The Collector's order was set aside due to the lack of timely action. (Paras 2-10)
Findings of Court:
The learned Single Judge found that the orders passed by the Mamlatdar were justified and that the Collector's later order was beyond a reasonable period. (Paras 11, 16)
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the orders passed after a significant delay and the validity of the Mamlatdar's inquiry into the land's tenure status. (Paras 11, 12)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the delay in exercising revisional powers rendered the Collector's order illegal, emphasizing the importance of timely action in administrative decisions. (Paras 11, 16)
Result: Appeal dismissed. (Para 18)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to land tenure orders (Para 1) |
| 2. details of land vesting (Para 2) |
| 3. appeal filed by tenure holder (Para 3) |
| 4. inquiry by mamlatdar (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 5. withdrawal of proceedings (Para 7) |
| 6. transfer of land to petitioner (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 7. state's contention on inquiry (Para 12) |
| 8. collector's inquiry justification (Para 13) |
| 9. findings on revenue records (Para 14) |
| 10. inconsistencies in records (Para 15) |
| 11. delay in administrative powers (Para 16 , 17) |
| 12. appeal outcome (Para 18) |
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
1. This intra Court appeal is directed against the judgement and order dated 15.06.2023 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition seeking to challenge the order dated 18.10.2007 passed by the Collector, Ahmedabad as also the order dated 16.06.2006 passed by the District Development Officer has been dismissed holding that the powers exercised by the said authorities to quash the orders dated 31.12.1993 and 15.02.1994 passed by the Mamlatdar, Daskroi and Deputy Collector, Viramgam Prant; respectively, after a period of almost 14 years, was illegal and bad, being beyond reasonable period for exercise of revisional powers.
2. The relevant facts pertaining to the matter in brief are that by order dated 11.05.1972, the Prant Officer, Viramgam had directed for vesting of the land in question in Survey No.414, 2-04 hectares of Village: Sola, Taluka: Daskroi, District: Ahmedabad, on the premise of the breach of condition (Sharat Bhang) of new tenure land and Entry No.3292 dated 21.12.1972 was posted in the Revenue records. A perusal of the order dated 11.05.1972 at Page No.”84/A and “84/B” of the paper book indicates that the reason given therein is that the tenure holder Ramabhai Rupabhai had entered into an arrangement with Kachrabhai Jivabhai without approval of the competent authority, which amounted to violation of terms and conditions of new tenure and the matter had been placed before the Mamlatdar for examination. It was noted that the notice dated 28.03.1972 was issued, but no one had appeared before the competent Court. It was, thus, opined that the possessor of the land in question, namely Ramabhai Rupabhai had violated the conditions of New tenure by making arrangement with Kachrabhai Jivabhai and the land in question, therefore, would vest with the State Government.
3. The tenure holder, the possessor of the land in question, namely Ramabhai Rupabhai filed an appeal before the Collector, Ahmedabad on 07.10.1993, agitating that no notice or opportunity of hearing had been given to him before passing the order dated 11.05.1972, based on which Entry No.3292 dated 21.12.1972 was made in the Revenue records. The said application was allowed in part by the Collector, Ahmedabad vide order dated 07.10.1993 setting aside the order dated 11.05.1972, relegating the matter to the Deputy Collector, Viramgam Prant for fresh decision after giving due opportunity to the land owner, noticing that no notice and opportunity of hearing was granted to the land owner prior to passing of the order dated 11.05.1972. On further relegation of the matter by the order dated 27.10.1993 by the Deputy Collector, Viramgam Prant, the matter was examined by the Mamlatdar, Daskroi, and an inquiry under Section 197 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code , 1879 was initiated to ascertain the nature of the land in question, whether it was an Old tenure or New tenure, in view of the assertion of the land owner namely Ramabhai Rupabhai that the entry of the New tenure in the Revenue records was without any basis and the said entry was required to be deleted and rectified in view of the Government Resolution dated 15.03.1982.
4. In the order dated 31.12.1993, the Mamlatdar recorded that the revenue entry of the year 1916-17 of Survey No.414 in the record of right was in the name of one Gordhan Dungar against whose name in Column No.2, ‘New Tenure’ entry has been crossed and
