ORAL JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner has preferred this petitioner under Articles

226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 27.2.2012 passed by the Additional Secretary Revenue Department (Appeal) – respondent No.3 rejecting the revision application of the petitioner of confirming the order dated 22.1.2009.

2. The brief facts fo the present petition, as emerged from the record, is that land bearing Survey No. 319 of village Sankhari, Taluka & District: Patan was originally belonging ancestral property belonging to Dhayashankar Tuljaram Dave, who died on 25.4.1993. Thereafter, on 25.10.1993, entry No. 2591 was mutated in the name of his legal heirs and vide entry No. 2592 names of Bhagwatiben Dhayashankar Dave, Taraben Dhayashankar Dave and the petitioner Kamlaben Dhayashankar Dave were deleted stating that they have relinquished their rights in the suit property in favour of their brothers.

2.1 Thereafter, on 30.7.1994, on account of family partition, Mutation entry No. 2627 was made whereby the land bearing Block No. 319 came in the share of Pravinchandra Dhayashankar Dave. On being informed that her name came to be deleted from the record of the rights as a co- owner though she was daughter of the deceased Dhayashankar, she was entitled to share of agricultural land of her father. She made application to enter her name in the revenue record. Thereafter, on 15.5.1998, her name was entered in the revenue record vide mutation entry No. 2826 which was confirmed by the Deputy Mamlatdar. Thereafter, on 6.4.2000, Pravinchandra Dhayashankar Dave died.

2.2 That on 30.10.2003, names of legal heirs of Pravinchandra Dhayashankar Dave were entered along with name of present petitioner vide entry No. 3284, which was also certified.

2.3 The entry No. 2826 came to be taken into suo-motu revision by the respondent No.1 i.e. Collector Patan after almost 10 years of the mutation of the said entry and he issued show-cause notice to the petitioner. In the said proceedings, name of Pravinchandra Dhayashankar Dave and that all the petitioners were shown as respondents. Inspite of the fact that Pravinchandra Dhayashankar Dave died in the year 2000 and name of his legal heirs were already been brought on record, vide entry No. 3284 dated 30.10.2003, no show-cause notice was issued to the legal heirs for giving opportunity of being heard to them. The Collector, Patan cancelled the entry No. 2826 on 15.5.1998 though there was a consent letter given by the legal heirs of Pravinchandra Dhayashankar Dave stating that they have no objection in continuing the name of the petitioner on the revenue record along with them.

2.4 Against the said order of the Collector, revision was filed, which came to be rejected by the respondent No.3.

3. Private Respondent Nos. 2A and 2B have supported the case of the petitioner and has filed afÏdavit to that effect and submitted that they have no objection for mutation of the name of the petitioner along with them as co-owner. It is also stated on oath they have filed consent letter individually before the learned Collector on afÏdavit to that effect.

4. One Shri D.A. Shah, Resident Additional Collector, Respondent No.1 herein for the State has filed afÏdavit-in- reply. It is submitted that the land bearing Revenue Survey No. 319, 335 of village: Sakhari, Taluka and District: Patan was originally and exclusively owned and occupied by one Shri Dhayashankar Tuljaram Dave who expired on 25.4.1993 and mutation entry bearing No. 2591 dated 25.10.1993 came to be recorded in the revenue record of the land in question and his legal heirs were brought on record. That thereafter, three daughters namely Dave Bhagwatiben Dhayashankar, Dave Taraben Dhayashankar and Dave Kamlaben Dhyashankar reqlinquished their right in the land in question and, thereafter, the names of Dave Rameshchandra Dhayashankar (2) Dave Pravinchandra Dhayashankar continued as joint owners in the revenue record of land in question.

4.1 It is further a