SCA/6581/1995 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 6581 of 1995 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG ========================================================= 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 ? ========================================================= SENDHABHAI SHANKARBHAI PRAJAPATI - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR KM SHETH for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR MR MENGDEY, ASSTT.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.S.GARG Date : 10/05/2007 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Shri K.M.Sheth, learned counsel for the petitioner; Shri M.R.Mengdey, learned AGP for SCA/6581/1995 2/4 JUDGMENT the respondent no.1; none for respondents no. 2 and 3 though served. 2. The petitioner, who had purchased certain agricultural land in the year 1980, got his name mutated on 27.10.80 vide entry no. 5993, obtained non-agricultural use permission in the year 1986, got maps and plans sanctioned from the Kalol Municipality, proceeded with construction, completed the same in the year 1986, suffered a notice to show cause somewhere in 1987 requiring him to explain that why order under Section 84-C of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act be not made against him. The petitioner appeared before the the authority and submitted his case. The Mamlatdar, in Tenancy Case No. 132/89 passed an order dated 4.10.89, directed vesting of the land in favour of the State Government, the said order was confirmed by the Deputy Collector, Mehsana on 16.8.91 and the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, vide its order dated 16.2.95 passed in Revision Application No. TENBA.801/91, dismissed the revision and on 7.6.95, dismissed the review SCA/6581/1995 3/4 JUDGMENT application summarily which was registered as No. TENCA.22/95. 3. Shri Sheth, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from perusal of para-4 of the order passed by the Mamlatdar, it would clearly appear that the petitioner was holding certain agricultural land in Village-Charada, Taluka- Vijapur and as definition of “to cultivate personally” provided under Section 2[6] of the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, has been amended in the year 1995, all these orders deserve to be quashed. 4. Shri Mengdey, learned AGP for the respondent- State, though tried to support the orders passed by the authorities and the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal, but was unable to show anything on question of the amendment of the definition and the effect of the amendment which was directing to deem that question of holding some other land in the village, as a block or within the periphery of 8 kilometers was not to come in force at any time. 5. In view of the amendment in the definition and SCA/6581/1995 4/4 JUDGMENT the fact that the petitioner, at the time of the purchase of the land in dispute was holding some agricultural land in Village-Charada, Taluka- Vijapur, I must hold that the transaction made in favour of the petitioner could not be set aside under Section 84-C of the Tenancy Act. The petition is allowed. The impugned orders passed by the Mamlatdar, Deputy Collector and the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal are hereby quashed. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No costs. [R.S. GARG, J.] pirzada/-