IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 8791 of 2025 ==========================================================

FOUR SQUARE GREEN ENERGY PVT. LTD.

Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. KARAN U VYAS(6992) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS DHRUMA U VYAS(6850) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR JAYNEEL PARIKH AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE Date : 19/08/2025

ORAL ORDER

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent-State.

2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking direction to quash and set aside the order dated 28.05.2025 bearing number 631/09/13/029/2025, passed in Application No. 20913202402473 and to grant certificate under Section 63AA of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948, in respect of Revenue Survey No. 219 p1, Village-Bhander, Ta: Dhoraji, Dis.-Rajkot.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed fresh application dated 12.07.2025 seeking permission, under Section 63AA of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Act, 1948, for establishment of industrial park. He submits that the said application has been rejected on the ground that similar application was rejected vide an order dated 08.08.2022 of the same, not having been challenged before the appellant authority. Learned counsel submits that the impugned order is unreasonable and suffers from lack of cogent reasons. He submits that the earlier application being rejected or consigned to file on technical defect or procedure lapses will not be include in such defects and submitting the application. He submits that the impugned order is not in accordance with the provisions of Section 63AA of the Act.

4. That the power exercised by the Collector under Section 63AA of the Act is administrative in nature and not quasi-judicial. Consequently, the principle of functus officio or bar on filing of a fresh application does not apply. Reliance is placed on the decision of this Court in M/s Rathore Steels v. State of Gujarat [Special Civil Application No. 8844 of 2024 decided on 02.05.2025], wherein it has been held that an application rejected or consigned to file on account of technical defects or procedural lapses does not preclude the applicant from curing such defects and submitting a fresh application, without being mandatorily required to prefer an appeal under Section 63AA(3)(d) of the Act. That the rejection of the petitioner’s application dated 28.05.2025 has been made solely on the grounds that the petitioner has failed to submit the certificate issued by the Industry Center / Industry Department as required, the application for permission was submitted beyond the prescribed time limit of 30 days, while verifying the revenue record for account holder verification, entry No. 1657 in the title deed requires necessary clarification, the case is pending before the IRCMS, and the construction area, as per the proposed layout plan, exceeds one-fourth of the total purchased land. That as per Section 63AA(3)(a) of the Act, upon receipt of notice from the purchaser within 30 days of purchase, the Collector is required to hold an inquiry to satisfy himself that the purchase was made for bonafide industrial purposes and thereafter issue a certificate. Rejection of the application dehors the said provision is, therefore, beyond jurisdiction. The impugned orders are thus, unsustainable in law and liable to be quashed and set aside.

5. Learned AGP Mr. Jayneel Parikh submits that the impugned order is in accordance with statutory provisions and no error has been committed by the Collector while rejecting the application. He further submits that the application of the present petitioner having been rejected, the petitioner ought to have preferred an appeal before the SSRD and in abse