IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 1235 of 2025 In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4563 of 2017 ==========================================================

ODHAVJIBHAI HARIBHAI DHEDHI Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR HITESH N ACHARYA(2302) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MS HETAL PATEL, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4 MR NK MAJMUDAR(430) for the Respondent(s) No. 10,11,12,13,14,6,7,8,9 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.

JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 18/12/2025

ORAL ORDER

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

1. No one appeared to press this appeal. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.10.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge, challenging the order dated 12.01.2012 passed by the Mamlatdar whereby the mutation entry no.6415 pertaining to the land bearing Block No.172, Village Navagam, Taluka Kamrej, District Surat, has been cancelled. The subsequent order dated 02.11.2012 passed by the Deputy Collector, Surat and the order dated 20.02.2014 passed by the Collector, Surat as also the order dated 30.06.2016 passed by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department were also subject matter of challenge before the writ Court.

2. It is noted by the learned Single Judge that the mutation entry in favour of the petitioner has been cancelled on the ground that the transfer of the agricultural land by way of registered Will was in breach of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. In so far as the private respondents herein, represented by Mr. N.K. Majmudar, learned advocate, pertinent is to note that on a query made by the Court, it is admitted by the learned advocate for the respondents that the private respondents as on date are not the recorded tenure holders of the land in question. The entry of the name of the private respondents made at an earlier point of time has been cancelled on the ground that the land in question had been acquired.

3. Be that as it may, having noted the fact that no one has appeared to press the present appeal since the date of filing of the same, we do not find any good ground to keep it pending. Looking to the facts stated in the writ petition, pertinent is to note that the petitioner claims that the original owner namely Lallubhai Kalabhai had expired on 07.05.2011 and thereafter, the petitioner had approached the revenue authority for mutation of his name in the revenue record on the basis of the Will executed by the deceased in favour of the petitioner. The private respondent nos.5 to 14 are stated to be heirs of late Lallubhai Kalabhai, who have objected to the application for mutation. The mutation entry no.6394 was made in favour of the respondent nos.5 to 14 on the ground of heirship. The mutation entry no.6415 was made on the basis of Will dated

29.03.2011 in favour of the original petitioner.

4. However, by order dated 12.01.2012, both the entries have been cancelled, noticing that by entry no.5422, it was certified that the land in question was in the use of the National Highway.

5. The contention of the petitioner in the writ petition is that only an area of 0-16-14 Hec.-Are-Sq. mtr. is in the use of National Highway and for the remaining area was with the original owner, who was entitled to execute the Will.

6. In so far as the entry no.6415 on the basis of Will, it is held by the Mamlatdar that the said entry is hit by Section-43 of the Tenancy Act, 1948, inasmuch as, transfer of agricultural land by way of Will without the permission of the Collector is impermissible within the scheme of Section-43 of the Tenancy Act, 1948.

7. Pertinent is to record that the learned Single Judge relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court has noted in paragraph-3 as under:-

“3. The learned counsel Mr.N.K. Majmudar appea