ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 30.01.2016 (02.02.2016) passed by the learned Additional Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals), Ahmedabad in Revision Application No. MVV/HKP/BC/99/2011 whereby the learned Secretary rejected the revision application of the petitioners and confirmed the order dated 26.09.2011 passed by the Collector, Bharuch. However, he has observed that in respect of the land in question, the decision of the Civil Suit which was pending at the relevant point of time, being Regular Civil Suit No. 16 of 2010 shall bind the parties and the revenue entries would be mutated as per the outcome of the aforesaid civil suit.

2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Gaurav Chudasama for the petitioners and learned advocate Mr. Dhairya Patel for learned advocate Mr.

Kashyap R. Joshi for the respondents no. 3 to 6.

3. The dispute pertains to a land bearing Block No. 314 admeasuring H-Are.Sq. 2-48-00 situated at Moje Saykha, Taluka: Vagara which was running in the name of one Jesangbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel. The said Jesangbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel has executed Will in favour of his brother Ishwarbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel on 18.07.1994. However, thereafter, family agreement by way of settlement deed also was executed and upon a statement of Jesangbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel, the name of Narotambhai Motibhai Patel was entered into the revenue record in respect of the land in question. As there were two conflicting documents, one – a will executed in favour of Ishwarbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel and by way of family arrangement and as per the statement of Jesangbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel, the name of Narotambhai Motibhai Patel was required to be mutated in the revenue record. Vide Entry No. 2893 the name of Narotambhai Motibhai Patel was mutated into revenue record on 28.04.2000. The present petitioners are legal heirs of Narotambhai Motibhai Patel whose name was entered into the revenue record by way of family agreement.

4. The respondents no. 3 to 6 in this petition are the legal heirs of Ishwarbhai Bhagwanbhai Patel in whose favour Jesangbhai has executed the will and therefore, when the Entry No. 2893 dated 28.04.2000 was mutated in the revenue record, when the same was rejected by the Circle Officer, Vagra vide order dated 18.07.2000 and the said was challenged by the present petitioners by way of Appeal No. 48 of 2008 before the Deputy Collector, Bharuch. The petitioners partly succeeded in the aforesaid appeal. The appeal was partly allowed and the matter was remanded back so as to enable the Mamlatdar to enter the name of legal heirs of deceased – Narotambhai Motibhai Patel as his legal heirs in respect of the revenue record, in the meantime, the Narotambhai Motibhai Patel had expired. In the meantime, another Entry No. 3125 was mutated. Vide Entry No. 3125, the name of the respondents no. 3 to 6 were mutated into revenue record on account of death of Ishwarbhai Bhagwanbhai in whose favour Jesangbhai Bhagwanbhai executed the will and as Ishwarbhai Bhagwanbhai expired on 26.12.2004 and as the Entry No. 2893 was cancelled in the year 2000 itself.

5. Upon order of remand by the Deputy Collector, Bharuch dated

30.09.2008/10.10.2008, another entry was mutated i.e. Entry No. 3335 and name of the petitioners were mutated into the revenue record.

6. Since, the facts are little confusing, for easy understanding of the case, the facts of the case can be summarized in respect of the relevant entries as under:-

1. Entry No. 2893:- This entry was mutated on account of family arrangement and on the basis of statement of Jesangbhai and accordingly the name of Narotambhai - father of the petitioners was entered into revenue record vide entry no. 2893 dated 28.04.2000. However, the said entry was rejected vide order dated 18.07.2000 by Circle Officer, Vagra on the ground that name of Narotambhai was not running in the 7/12 extract of the revenue record. The aforesaid rejection order dated 18.07.2000 was challenged afte