The court upheld that procedural lapses and incorrect legal interpretation invalidated the orders of the competent authority on land ownership.

1. The petitioners, who happen to be the legal heirs of the original owner late Shri Amrutlal Jamnadas Lakdawala of the subject land, had filed the present petition for quashing and setting aside the order dated 19.12.1986 passed by the respondent No. 1 - competent authority and Deputy Collector (Annexure 'B'), and the order dated 22.10.1990 passed by the ULC Tribunal, Surat (Annexure 'C') declaring the land admeasuring 1066.7 sq. mtrs. out of the Survey No. 486 as the excess vacant land.

2. It appears that the petition was earlier disposed of by the Single Bench vide the order dated 05.05.1999 on the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as 'the ULC Act') having been repealed by the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Repeal Act'), having come into force. Being aggrieved by the said order, the State Government had preferred the Letters Patent Appeal No. 456 of 2003. The Division Bench vide the common order dated 29.07.2004 allowed the said Letters Patent Appeal along with others, and set aside the order passed by the Single Bench and further remanded the matter to the Single Bench for deciding it afresh on merits. The respondent No. 1 thereafter filed an affidavit - in - reply, to which the petitioners have filed an affidavit - in - rejoinder. It also appears that pending the petition, considering the subsequent events, the Surat Urban Development Authority, the Town Planning Officer and the Surat Municipal Corporation were permitted to be impleaded as the respondent Nos. 3 to 5 in the petition.

3. As per the case of the petitioners, late Shri Amrutlal Jamnadas Lakdawala had filled in form No. 1 under S.6 of the ULC Act, declaring his holdings including the land bearing Survey No. 486 admeasuring 1 acre 2 gunthas i.e. 5767 sq. mtrs. situated at village Vasu. According to the petitioners, the said Amrutlal had applied on 13.08.1976 to the State Government seeking exemption in respect of the said land bearing Survey No. 486 under S.20 of the ULC Act for using it for agricultural purpose. The competent authority by the order dated 23.05.1978 held that as the said land was falling within the agricultural zone, it could not be treated as the vacant land, and therefore, the question of granting exemption does not arise (Annexure 'A'). The respondent No. 1 - competent authority thereafter vide the order dated 15.12.1980 filed the form No. 1 of the said Amrutlal on the ground that the said land fell within the agricultural zone in the master plan. It appears that the said order was taken in the suo motu review by the State Government and without giving any opportunity of hearing to the said Amrutlal, the State Government set aside the order of competent authority and remanded the case to the competent authority for deciding it afresh after holding requisite inquiry. The competent authority thereafter again reconsidered the case and vide the order dated 19.12.1986 held that the said Amrutlal held 1066.7 sq. mtrs. of land, out of the Survey No. 486 as the excess vacant land (Annexure 'B'). It appears that thereafter the said Amrutlal Jamnadas having expired on 25.07.1988, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the ULC Tribunal along with the application seeking condonation of delay on the ground that they were not aware about the said order passed by the competent authority. The said appeal was registered as Appeal No. 20 of 1990 before the ULC Tribunal. The said Tribunal taking lenient view regarding the delay, condoned the same, h