IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1400 of 2022 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR DIRECTION) NO. 1 of 2023 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1400 of 2022 ================================================================

HIRALAL NARSINHBHAI HADAKIYA Versus STATE OF GUJARAT ================================================================

Appearance:

MR. NISHIT P GANDHI(6946) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3 YAGNESHKUMAR S JOSHI(8074) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3 MR JAYNEEL PARIKH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ================================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA Date : 01/02/2023

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule. Learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for the respondent-State.

2. By way of the present petition, the petitioners have invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction vested in this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and thereby seek to challenge the order dated 29.10.2021 passed by the Collector, Surat. By the impugned order, the Collector, Surat has passed a fresh order on 29.10.2021 and modified the condition No.14 and has imposed a fresh condition No.14 directing to maintain status quo qua the revenue record.

3. Learned advocate Mr.Nishit Gandhi appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the dispute pertains to land bearing old Revenue Survey No.490 paiki (New Survey No.299/3) of Final Town Planning Scheme No.6 (Vesu), having Final Plot No.40, situated at Village Vesu, Taluka Majura, District Surat. It is submitted that the condition no.14, which is incorporated by the Collector while granting NA permission vide order dated 03.02.2016 modified vide order dated 29.10.2021 since the Collector has no authority to incorporate such observations while granting NA permission exercising his powers under the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 (for short “the Code”). In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Tusharbhai Harjibhai Ghelani vs. State of Gujarat and Ors., 2019 (4) GLR 2578.

4. Learned AGP Mr.Parikh, while opposing the present writ petition, has submitted that the impugned order does not require any interference since Civil Suit No.301 of 2006 is pending before Principal Civil Judge, Surat and hence, the Collector has modified the condition no.14 of the original order dated 03.02.2016 by the order dated 29.10.2021 and instead of maintaining status quo, he has observed that the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the revenue entries.

5. The petitioners applied for NA permission before the District Collector, who, while granting NA permission vide order dated 03.02.2016, has incorporated various conditions and the relevant condition nos.13 and 14 of the said order. The condition no.13 incorporates that the order dated 03.02.2016 would be subject to the result of Civil Suit No.301 of 2006, which is pending before the Civil Court, Surat as well as Civil Revision Appeal No.278 of 2013 pending before this Court. The condition No.14, of which the petitioner is aggrieved mentions that the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to land in question for which the NA permission is granted till the Civil Court decides the Civil Suit.

6. Being aggrieved, the petitioners challenged the aforesaid condition before the SSRD. By the order dated 10.02.2021, the SSRD remanded the matter to the District Collector. On remand the matter, by the impugned order dated 29.10.2021, the District Collector, Surat modified the aforesaid condition no.14 and instead has recorded that the parties shall maintain status quo with regard to the revenue record till the final decision of the civil suit.

7. It is also not in dispute that Exh.5 application moved in the concerned civil suit was allowed by the order dated 31.08.2010 by the Principal Civil Judge, Surat, which has been set aside by this Court in Appeal from Order No.315 of 2010, which has been confirmed by the Apex Court vi