ORAL ORDER

1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to allow and admit the present petition;

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dated 25.09.2014 passed by the Hon’ble Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application TEN.BA No.236 of 2000;

(C) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and execution of the order dated 25.09.2014 passed by the Hon’ble Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application TEN.BA No.236 of 2000 and further be pleased to direct the respondents herein not to create any third party rights and maintain status-quo qua the land in question;

(D) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case.”

2. Heard learned advocate Mr.Vimal Purohit for the petitioner, learned AGP Mr.Akash Chhaya for respondent nos.2 and 3., learned advocate Mr.Hriday Buch for the respondent no.5 and learned advocate Mr.Nishant Lalakiya for respondent no.4.

3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present petition are stated as under:

3.1. An agricultural land situated at revenue survey no.156 of village: Rajpara, taluka: Dhandhuka, district: Ahmedabad, admeasuring 12 Acres and 33 gunthas(hereinafter referred to as “the land in question”) was originally owned by one Faijibha Bapabhai Nathubha Parmar and one Atubha Shaybaji who happens to be the tenant in respect of the said land and the legal heirs of Atubha Shaybaji has preferred the present petition.

3.2. The land in question was mortgaged due to loan which is described in common language as Tagavi due to defaults in payment of the aforesaid loan, the DDO Ahmedabad had to auction the aforesaid land and ultimately, the present respondent no.4 succeeded in the auction which was carried out on 03.07.1965 and he was required to pay a purchase price of Rs.1601 and on making payment of the aforesaid amount, he became the owner of the land and for that an entry no.217 was mutated in the revenue records. The respondent no.4 was put into the possession of the land in question on 31.10.1967. Since, it was challenged on the ground that the auction suo motu proceedings were illegal as they were initiated without obtaining prior permission of the Collector.

3.3. Thereafter, the order of auctioning the land was challenged before the Mamlatdar and ALT, Dhandhuka vide Case No.43/Rajpar/464/75 as it was alleged that the auction proceedings were illegal however vide order dated 28.02.1975, Mamlatdar and ALT allowed the Case No. 43/Rajpar/464/75 and held that auction proceeding were illegal as the same was without the permission of the Collector.

3.4. The order dated 28.02.1975 passed by the Mamlatdar and Alt was a subject matter of challenge before the Assistant Collector in Tenancy Appeal No.164-75 filed by Jasabbhai Sulemanbhai who was the purchaser of the land by way of an auction. However, even Assistant Collector rejected the appeal preferred by the respondent no.4 vide order dated 26.03.1976 and therefore he preferred an application being Revision Application No.TEN.B.A.674/76 under Section 76 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agriculture Land Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) and challenged the order dated 26.03.1976 passed by Assistant Collector. However, even the revision application preferred by the respondent no.4 also was rejected vide order dated 07.01.1977.

3.5. Ultimately respondent no.4 once again challenged the order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘the GRT’) dated 07.01.1977 by filing a writ petition before this Court being Special Civil Application No.1156 of 1977 and vide order dated 16.08.1982 the respondent no.4 succeeded and ultimately the matter was remanded back to the GRT.

3.6. Upon remand,