IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 5838 of

2025 In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 33953 of 2025 With F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 33953 of 2025 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20079 of 2023 With CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2025 In F/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 33953 of 2025 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 20079 of 2023 ==========================================================

STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

Versus TUSHARBHAI CHANDUBHAI PATEL ==========================================================

Appearance:

MS. HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 11/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

This is a wholly misconceived appeal filed on behalf of the State appellants challenging the judgment and order dated

22.11.2024 passed by the learned single Judge.

2. At the outset, we may note that the delay of 319 days has not been explained to the satisfaction of the Court, inasmuch as, casual assertions have been made in the application seeking condonation of delay about the administrative delay, i.e. the time taken in seeking permission for filling of the present appeal.

3. However, on the submissions made by Ms. Hetal Patel, the learned AGP appearing for the State appellants, we proceeded to examine the merits of the case as well.

4. Pertinent is to note that the land-in-question was of the ownership of one Nilkantheshwar Mahadev Trust and one Shri Fatehsang Dabhai Vaghela was the tenant of the said land. The impugned order records that the original tenant namely Shri Fatehsang Dabhai Vaghela executed an agreement in favour of three persons, namely Shri Chhatrasang Jinabhai Rathod, Shri Mansang Jinabhai Rathod and Shri Musabhai Mansingbhai Rathod on 20.09.1963. Agricultural activities on the land-in-question were being carried out by the said three persons. The original tenant had passed away in the year 1965 and the persons in whose favour the agreement dated 20.09.1963 was executed had continued with the agricultural activities over the land-in-question.

5. In the interregnum, the proceedings under Section 32G of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tenancy Act, 1948’) came to be instituted and Shri Chhatrasang Jinabhai and others were declared as tenants of the land-in-question, and on payment of purchase price, certificate under Section 32M of the Tenancy Act, 1948 came to be issued in their favour on 04.01.1972. The permission to convert the land-in- question from restricted tenure land to the unrestricted tenure land for agricultural purposes has also been granted on the application filed by the persons in whose favour certificate under Section 32M was issued. Shri Chhatrasang Jinabhai Rathod, later sold the land- in-question to three other persons vide registered sale deed dated 18.08.1975, whose names were recorded in the Revenue Record vide Mutation Entry No. 2746 dated 13.10.1975. The said purchasers had continued with the agricultural activities for almost

36 years without any hindrance.

6. The petitioner before the learned single Judge came to be inducted in the land-in-question vide registered sale deed dated 26.08.2011. However, the dispute arose when the petitioner had approached the revenue authorities for mutation of his name in the revenue records. The refusal to record the name of the petitioner was on the ground that the proceedings under Section 84C of the Tenancy Act, 1948 was pending against him. Pertinent is to record that the proceedings under Section 84C had been initiated at the instance of the heirs of the original tenant Shri Fatehsang Dabhai Vaghela. In the said proceedings, the petitioner had applied for joining as a party respondent and vide order dated 30.10.2012,