JUDGMENT :

Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Mr. Jay Barot, learned AGP waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of respondent – State authorities.

2. By way of the present petition, the petitioner herein has prayed for the following relief:

“30. Taking into consideration the above grounds and others that may be urged at the time of hearing, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased: -

(A) To admit and allow this petition.

(B) To issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the orders dated 14.7.2025 (Annexure-Z2) and order dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure-Z4) passed by Collector, Kutch rejecting application for NA submitted by petitioner and further be pleased to grant the said application dated 8.11.2025 at (Annexure-Z3) by granting the Non Agriculture Permission under Section 65 to the land of the petitioner.

(C) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of the above Special Civil Application, to stay the execution, implementation and operation of orders dated 14.7.2025 (Annexure-Z2) and order dated 31.12.2025 (Annexure-Z4) passed by Collector, Kutch rejecting application for NA submitted by petitioner.

(D) The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other appropriate relief as the nature circumstances of the case may require.

(E) To award the cost of this petition.”

3. The petitioner challenges the orders passed by the respondent no. 2 - Collector, Kutch dated 14.07.2025 and 31.12.2025 whereby the Collector rejected the application preferred by the petitioner for Non-Agricultural (NA) permission on the ground that Entry Nos. 125 and 790 mentions that the land is Government land. The petitioner submits that part of the Survey No.17 of which the petitioner herein applied for the NA permission under provision of the Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, (for short, “the Code”) has already been granted NA permission to the four different parts land in question and on the basis of the same part of land which is Revenue Entry is same but application of the petitioner for NA permission is rejected inspite of the name of the petitioner being in the revenue records.

4. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition reads thus:

4.1. The dispute pertains to land bearing Survey No. 17 located at Mouje: Naliya, Taluka: Abdasa, District: Kutch. That Entry No. 125 was mutated in the revenue records and the name of Kunvarji Jetha was mutated wherein, once line contained reference to “Shree Sarkar”; however, subsequently Entry No. 2945 mutated on 02.09.1999 and certified on 08.10.1999 reflected the names of private occupants/legal heirs and thereafter the revenue record continuously reflected private ownership.

4.2. In respect of Survey No. 17 and its sub-divisions, NA permissions were granted on several occasions. Entry No. 3265 reflected grant of NA permission to part of the land and Entry No. 3701 dated 31.08.2007 reflected grant of NA permission to Survey No.17/p2 pursuant to order dated 20.06.2003 passed by the Taluka Development Officer. Subsequently, Collector, Kutch also granted NA permissions to the part of the land in questions vide orders dated 19.09.2019 and 17.12.2019 and corresponding Entry Nos.5994 and 6036 came to be mutated. The petitioner purchased part of land bearing Survey No. 17 Paiki 1 Paiki 4, admeasuring 8094 sq.mtrs. by registered sale deed dated 21.05.2021 and Entry No. 6244 came to be mutated in his favour on 14.06.2021. Thereafter, upon application made by the petitioner, the Mamlatdar vide order dated 08.01.2024 directed separation of the revenue records of petitioner’s land and Entry No. 6730 came to be certified on 06.02.2024. Separate Forms No.7/12, 8-A and 12 also came to be issued in the name of the petitioner.

4.3. The petitioner again applied for NA permission on 22.05.2025 and thereafter on 08.11.2025, the appl