ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Heard learned senior advocate Mr.Anshin Desai with Mr.Satyam Chhaya, learned advocate for the petitioner and Mr.Nikunj Kanara, learned AGP for the respondent State at length.

2. The petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the order dated 23.01.2018 passed in Revision Application No. JNR/JMN/29/2016 passed by the learned SSRD- respondent no.1 as well as order passed by District Collector dated 4.6.2016 in Suo Motu/ Revision/1/2016-17 and further be pleased to hold and declare that the proceedings initiated by the learned District Collector invoking the provision of Section 211 of the BLRC are bad in law and without jurisdiction; In the alternative (B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent authority to extend the benefit of government resolution dated 6.6.2003 to the petitioner by regularizing/ considering the alleged breach as his first breach by imposing necessary penalty and be further pleased to direct the respondent authority to consider the case of the petitioner for change of use as per the prevailing policy;

(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for change of use as per the prevailing policy of the State Government and be further pleased to hold and declare that in view of the change circumstances since the land having been included in the residential zone, contract between the parties for utilizing the land for industrial use, particularly, for more manufacturing cement has got frustrated and not possible to be fulfilled;

(D) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and execution of the 23.01.2018 passed in Revision Application No. JNR/JMN/29/2016 passed by the learned SSRD- respondent no.1 as well as order passed by District Collector dated 4.6.2016 in Suo Motu/

Revision/1/2016-17; and final (E) During the pendency disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent authority to place on record the order passed upon an application preferred by the petitioner for change of use and further be pleased to permit the petitioner to prefer such application for change of use if at all earlier one is decided, and be pleased to direct the respondent authority to decide the same in accordance with law (F) Any other and further relief that may deem fit by this Hon'ble Court in the interest of justice;”

3. The brief facts are as under:

3.1 In the year 1995, the petitioner was allotted the land by the learned District Collector, Jamnagar vide its order dated 07.08.1995 bearing the Revenue Survey Nos.17 admeasuring Hectares 0-66-77; Survey No.18 admeasuring Hectares 1-53-78; Survey No.70 admeasuring Hectares 0-42-50 of Survey No.72 admeasuring Hectares 01-42-61 situated in Village Jogvad, Taluka- Lalpur, District- Jamnagar. Thereafter the possession came to be handed over to the petitioner by the respondent authority on 24.05.1996 and 07.08.1995.

4. Thereafter, the kabulat in the form of “II” under Rule 43 of the Act came to be issued to the petitioner, the said lands were allotted to the petitioner for the manufacturing of the cement and therefore the petitioner sought requisite permission from the concerned departments and serious efforts were made to use the land for the purpose for which it was allotted and the petitioner had also made an application for issuance of the public issue to generate funds for effective implementation of the products however, the things could not materialize since neither the State Government allotted permission for mining lease nor the Pollution Control Board issued NOC and therefore requisite permission could not be availed by the petitioner. The petitioner has also placed an order for purchase of machinery amounting to Rs.3.5 Crores a