IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 15498 of 2018 ==========================================================

LEENABEN SHETALBHAI SHAH Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

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

Appearance:

MR ANKIT SHAH(6371) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS. SURBHI BHATI, LD. ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5 JENIL M SHAH(7840) for the Respondent(s) No. 6 NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 7.1,7.2,7.3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DIVYESH A. JOSHI Date : 06/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has called in question the legality and validity of the order dated 12.06.2018 passed by the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department in Revision Application No.MVV/HKP/BHAVAN/12/2011 as well as the order dated 25.11.2010 passed by the District Collector, Bhavnagar in R.O./Revision/44/09-10.

2. Facts, in brief, giving rise to the filing of the present application may be summarized as under;

2.1 The respondent Nos.6 and 7 herein had jointly purchased a property at Bhavnagar, being City Survey No.1284 by way of a registered sale deed No.307 dated 02.02.1971. Out of the said land, Plot No.119/B/1 admeasuring 204.03 square meters was gifted by the respondent No.7 to the applicant herein by way of a registered Gift Deed No.1588 dated 23.04.2007.

2.2 On the basis of the aforesaid gift deed, the name of the writ applicant came to be mutated in the revenue record vide Entry No.2478 on 30.08.2007.

2.3 Being aggrieved by the said entry, the respondent No.6 preferred an appeal before the Deputy Collector, which came to be rejected vide order dated 22.12.2009.

2.4 The aforesaid order dated 22.12.2009 passed by the Deputy Collector was challenged before the District Collector by filing Revision being No.44/09-10, and the District Collector vide its order dated 25.11.2010 allowed the said revision application and cancelled the Mutation Entry No.2478.

2.5 Being aggrieved, the writ applicant preferred Revision Application bearing No.MVV/HKP/BHAVAN/12/2011 before the SSRD, however, the SSRD vide its order dated 12.06.2018, rejected the said revision application and upheld the order passed by the District Collector dated 25.11.2010.

2.6 Being aggrieved, the writ applicant is here before this Court with the present application.

3. Learned advocate Ms. Pratha Bhavsar for learned advocate Mr. Ankit Shah appearing for the writ applicant submits that the impugned order dated 12.06.2018 is bad in law, illegal, against the settled provisions of law and suffers from vice of non-application of mind, and as such, deserves to be quashed and set aside. She further submits that initially the respondent Nos.6 and 7 jointly purchased the property bearing Survey No.1284 in the year 1971 by way of a registered sale deed, however, subsequently, partition took place amongst the family members, wherein Plot No.119/B/1 admeasuring 204.03 square meters came in the share of the respondent No.7. She also submits that the writ applicant happens to be the daughter-in-law of the respondent No.7, and out of love and affection towards the writ applicant, the respondent No.7, on his own free will and volition, gifted his part of share, i.e. Plot No.119/B/1 to the writ applicant by executing a gift deed, pursuant to which, the name of the writ applicant also came to be mutated in the revenue record vide Entry No.2478, which was also certified subsequently. Learned advocate Ms. Bhavsar further submits that the said Gift Deed was executed on 23.04.2007, and till today the same has not been challenged by any of the respondents before any competent court.

4. Learned advocate Ms. Bhavsar further submits that the Collector as well as the SSRD has failed to appreciate and consider the fact that the respondent No.7, on his own free will and volition, gifted his sha