JUDGMENT :

VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Dharitri Pancholi, learned AGP waives the service of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent – State authorities.

2. Heard Mr. Vimal A. Purohit, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner and Ms. Dharitri Pancholi, learned AGP appearing for the respondent – State authorities.

3. By way of the present petition, the petitioner herein has prayed for the following reliefs:

“(17) In the premises aforesaid, Petitioners most humbly and respectfully prays that:

(A) YOUR LORDSHIP'S may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ in the nature of certiorari, order or direction quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 21.11.2023 passed by the learned District Collector, Vadodara in application no. 31916202305954 (At Annexure A) and further be pleased to direct the learned District Collector, Vadodara application for Change to allow of use permission preferred by the petitioners strictly under the ambit of the Section 65(A) of Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879;

(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to direct the respondent authority- Ld. District Collector, Vadodara to consider the application for grant of Change of use permission in light of the settled legal principle (Annexure A);

(C) Pass any such other and/or further orders that may be thought just and proper, in the facts and circumstances of the present case;”

4. The petitioner herein is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 21.11.2023 passed by the respondent no. 2 – District Collector wherein the petitioners application for revised Non-Agricultural (NA) permission bearing Application No. 31916202305954 dated 07.10.2023 was filed on the ground of deficit stamp duty upon the negative opinion of the Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty. It is submitted that the petitioner herein is in receipt of a valid NA permission since 2012 and for the deficit stamp duty separate proceedings are initiated against the petitioner, however, while considering the case of the petitioner for revised NA, the findings arrived at by the respondent no. 2 are beyond jurisdiction.

5. Briefly stated, it is the case of the petitioner that the land bearing Survey No. 58 of Village: Kalali, Taluka: Vadodara City, District: Vadodara was originally owned and occupied by Bharat Chandrakantbhai Patel. That, the Sonal Raju Shah i.e. wife of the petitioner purchased land bearing Survey No. 58 by way of registered Sale Deed No. 8945 dated 25.09.2009 from the original owner, pursuant to which mutation Entry No. 1842 dated 13.10.2009 came to be mutated and duly certified.

5.1. The petitioner preferred application under Section 65 of Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, (for short, “the Code”) for grant of NA use permission, pursuant to which by order dated 08.08.2012, District Collector, Vadodara granted NA permission and effect to the same was given vide mutation Entry No. 2131 dated 26.09.2012. Rajubhai Bhailalbhai Shah entered the name of his legal heirs, i.e., Adit Rajubhai Shah and Ruchi Rajubhai Shah in revenue records as co- owners of the land in question, pursuant to which Mutation Entry No.3019 dated 29.06.2019 came to be mutated and duly certified.

5.2. The petitioner preferred application before D.I.L.R for partitioning land bearing Survey No. 58, pursuant to which D.I.L.R vide order dated 22.08.2019 allowed the application and the land bearing Survey No. 58 came to be divided into two parts: (1) Survey No. 58/1 admeasuring 1815 sq. mtr which came into the part of petitioner (2) Survey No. 58/2 admeasuring 4053 sq. mtr (for short, “land in question”) which went into the share of Raju Bhailalbhai Shah, Adit Rajubhai Shah and Ruchi Rajubhai Shah and effect to the said order came to be given effect in revenue records vide mutation Entry No. 3046 dated 22.08.2019.

5.3. Adit Rajubhai Shah and Ruchi Rajubhai Shah relinquished their rights in favor of the petitioner, pursua