SCA/846820/2002 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8468 of 2002 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT - Petitioner(s) Versus KIRTISINGH ASHABHAI PARMAR & 1 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MS ML SHAH, AGP for Petitioner(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 1 - 2. MR BJ PATEL for Respondent(s) : 1.2.1 - 2. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 02/12/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The State Government is in appeal challenging judgement and order dated 27.4.2001 passed by Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in Revision Application SCA/846820/2002 2/4 JUDGMENT TEN.B.A. 143/1999. 2. Issue pertains to Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act. Respondents hold agricultural lands in excess of ceiling limit. Proceedings under Gujarat Agricultural lands Ceiling Act were therefore, initiated. Mamlatdar and ALT eventually declared 22 acres and 33 gunthas of land of the respondents as excess. After unsuccessfully challenging the same before the Deputy Collector, the respondents approached Gujarat Revenue Tribunal. Revenue Tribunal by impugned judgement dated 27.4.2001 though turned down all other contentions of the land owners, held in their favour with respect to nature of irrigation facilities in the land finding that portion of the land being irrigated through dug well did not fall within command area of irrigation project or in the river bed, stream or natural collection of of water or a drainage channel, the Tribunal found that such land cannot be categorised as perennially irrigated in view of the definition given in Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act under Section 2(6) read with explanation I(g) thereof. 3. In the present petition, therefore, limited question that calls for consideration is whether the Tribunal was justified in coming to such a conclusion and therefore, reducing the excess land of the respondents to the extent of 12 SCA/846820/2002 3/4 JUDGMENT acres and 25 gunthas as opposed to 22 acres and 33 gunthas declared by the Mamlatdar. 4. Having heard learned AGP Ms. Shah for the State and learned advocate Mr. Patel for the respondents, I find that the Tribunal committed no error. It is not in dispute that the well was a dug well and not tube well. In that view of the matter, in light of section 2(6) read with explanation I(g) of the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act, such land irrigated by dug wells would not be treated as irrigated land unless the well is in the command of an irrigation project or in the bed of a river, stream or natural collection of water or drainage channel. 5. There is nothing on record to suggest that above requirements were satisfied. In fact the Tribunal came to factual findings that it was not so. That being the position, there is no error in the factual findings of the tribunal which can be corrected in a writ petition. In that view of the matter, petition lacks merits and is required to be dismissed. 6. In the concluding portion of the decision, tribunal declared 12 acres and 25 gunthas of land of respondent as surplus land and permitted them to exercise option for fresh option for retention of their land. It would be open for SCA/846820/2002 4/4 JUDGMENT the Government to proceed accordingly and take possession of the land to the extent so declared by surplus by the Tribunal after given necessary option to the respondents. 7. The petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated. (Akil Kureshi,J.) (raghu)