SCA/868820/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 8688 of 2008 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 ? ========================================================= RAMANBHAI VITHALBHAI PATEL - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR NV GANDHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR HUKAMSINH, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, NOTICE SERVED BY DS for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 26/08/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Learned AGP, Shri Hukamsinh, waives service of SCA/868820/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT rule on behalf of the respondents. This petition is taken up for final disposal at the joint request of the learned advocates of the parties. 2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs: “(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or directions and be pleased to direct the respondents to take appropriate steps to implement the order dat Annexure-A to this petition and be further pleased to direct them to make entry in record of rights for the land bearing Revenue Survey No.350 having Block No.524 situated at Village: Dindoli, Taluka: Choryashi, District: Surat in respect of the order at Annexure-A to this petition. (B) During the pendency and disposal of this petition Your Lordships may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner. (C ) YOUR LORDSHIPS be pleased to pass any other and further order as may be deemed fit in favour of the petitioners”. 3. It is not in dispute that Mamlatdar & ALT, Chorayashi way back on 14.5.2002 after holding an inquiry held that the land in question, namely, survey No.350, Block No.524 admeasuring 1 Hectare, 44 Are and 68 sq.mtrs. cannot be subjected to restrictions under Section 43 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agriculture Lands Act as the land was held by predecessors-in-title of the petitioners as permanent tenants long before the amendment in the Tenancy Act was brought in to effect in the year 1956. SCA/868820/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT 4. Previously, when the matter was taken up for hearing, learned AGP was given an opportunity to verify whether against the order passed by the Mamlatdar on 14.5.2002 any revision or appeal is pending before the higher authority. Today, under instructions, he stated that no such further proceedings are pending. That being so, petitioner cannot be deprived of the benefits flowing from the order passed by the Mamlatdar. Learned AGP, Shri Hukamsinh, however, submitted that the decision of the learned Single Judge in the case of BABUBHAI VITTHALBHAI PATEL THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY Versus MAMLATDAR & AGRICULTURAL LANDS TRIBUNAL (GANOT) & 1 passed in Special Civil Application No.9609 of 2006 and allied matters on 17-18-23/01/2007 has been carried in appeal by the State and the Letters Patent Appeal is pending. However, in special facts of this case wherein I find that at the hands of Mamlatdar entire issue in favour of the petitioner was concluded way back in the year 2002 and such order of the Mamlatdar was never carried in appeal or taken in suo-moto revision, it is no longer possible to deprive the petitioner of the benefits flowing from such an order. 5. Learned advocate for the petitioner relied on an order dated 4.4.2008 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in Special Civil Application No.29898 of 2007 wherein under somewhat similar circumstances directions were given for carrying out and implementing the decision of the Mamlatdar, however, upon condition that the petitioner shall not alienate or transfer the land for a period of three SCA/868820/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT months from the date of the order. 6. In the result, the petition is disposed of by directing the respondents to implement the order of the Mamlatdar Annexure-A and to give necessary effect thereto in the revenue records. However, this is subject to the conditions that the petitioner shall not transfer or alienate in any manner the land or any part thereof for a period of three months from today and that undertaking to this effect shall be filed before the Court within a week hereof. 7. With these directions, this petition is disposed of. Rule made absolute. Direct service permitted. (AKIL KURESHI, J.) ashish//