IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No 13481 of 1993 For Approval and Signature: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI ============================================================ 1. Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed : YES to see the judgements? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not? : NO 3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : NO of the judgement? 4. Whether this case involves a substantial question : NO of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 of any Order made thereunder? 5. Whether it is to be circulated to the concerned : NO Magistrate/Magistrates,Judge/Judges,Tribunal/Tribunals? -------------------------------------------------------------- BALDEVBHAI UKAJI Versus SECRETARY -------------------------------------------------------------- Appearance: 1. Special Civil Application No. 13481 of 1993 MR BP TANNA for Petitioner No. 1 - Absent MR SP HASURKAR, AGP for Respondent No. 1-2 -------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.K.ABICHANDANI Date of decision: 24/09/2004 ORAL JUDGEMENT #. The petitioner challenges the order dated 12th August, 1983 of the State Government, rejecting the petitioner's revision application and confirming the order of the Collector, dated 4.2.'91, by which the order of the City Deputy Collector, dated 23.1.'87 under which it was held that the land in dispute was old tenure land, was set aside. #. It is evident from the impugned decision that, revisional authority found on the basis of the earlier entries and the village record that the land was of new tenure since 1940-41. In para-5 of its order, the Tribunal has referred to the material in the form of revision survey, village record and the earlier order of the Deputy Collector dated 10.12.1979 holding that the land was new tenure land and held that the order of the Deputy Collector, dated 23.1.'87 was rightly set aside by the Collector by his order dated 4th June, 1991. #. The revisional authority has come to a finding that the land was new tenure land since 1940-41 on the basis of the material on record and in lawful exercise of its jurisdiction warranting no interference with the order by this Court in exercise of its extraordinary power. The petition is, therefore, rejected. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. Interim relief stands vacated. [R.K. ABICHANDANI, J.] pirzada/-