Gujarat High Court
Sabbir Musa Patel vs State Of Gujarat on 7 December, 2023
Author: Nirzar S. Desai
Bench: Nirzar S. Desai
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/4499/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4499 of 2023
=========================================
SABBIR MUSA PATEL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
=========================================
Appearance :
MR HET N SHAH WITH MR SP MAJMUDAR for the Petitioner.
for the Respondent No.2.
MR ADITYASINH JADEJA, AGP for the Respondents.
=========================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRZAR S. DESAI
Date : 07/12/2023
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to direct the Collector, Vadodara to decide / determine the amount of premium for the land in question, after giving an opportunity of hearing pursuant to the order passed by Division Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.784 of 2017 (at ANNEXURE-B hereto) and further be pleased to direct the Respondent - Collector to decide the price of premium before 15.04.2023 as the prices of Jantri are increasing to 100% (double) pursuant to the Notification of State Government dated 11.02.2023.
2. At the outset, learned advocate Mr. S. P. Majmudar appearing for the petitioner, upon instructions, states that at the time when the petition was preferred, as the new Jantri rates were expected any time soon, the prayer was made to direct the Collector, Vadodara to decide the representation before 15.4.2023. However, now since new Jantri rates are applicable, the Collector, Vadodara may be directed to decide the representation of the Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:47:22 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4499/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined petitioner that the petitioner would make in case if the Court directs the Collector to decide the same within some reasonable time considering direction issued in respect of the very land by the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 16.2.2021 in Letters Patent Appeal No.784 of 2017.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Majmudar draws attention of this Court to the observations made by the Division Bench in paragraphs 7 to 9 of the aforesaid judgment dated 16.2.2021 which are as under :-
"7. We have heard learned Counsel Mr. Sharvil Majmudar for the Appellant, learned Government Counsel Mr. Utkarsh Sharma for Respondent nos.1 and 4 and learned Counsel Ms. Mini Nair for the Respondent no.5. We are of the opinion that the issue with regard to Premium to be decided under Section 43 of the Tenancy Law while was being remanded to the Competent Authority, any findings on the merits of the contentions, which could be possibly raised before the Competent Authority, were not required to be decided by the learned Single Judge and the Competent Authority should have been left free to decide the case on determining the Amount of Premium in accordance with law. The rates, as on which date or year, will be applicable to decide the said Amount of Premium, should have been left free to be decided by the said Competent Authority himself, whether for the years 2007, 2013 or 2017, or rates prevailing now when Page 2 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:47:22 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4499/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined the Competent Authority decides the said Amount of Premium.
8. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the Order of the learned Single Judge deserves to be modified to the extent that upon remand to the Competent Authority, he will be free to decide the Amount of Premium in accordance with law in his own discretion uninfluenced by the observations made by the learned Single Judge. The concerned parties as well as the proper Legal Representatives to be brought on record, may have the right of say before the said Competent Authority and the Competent Authority is expected to decide the proceedings afresh, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of Six Months from today. The concerned parties, without any further notice, may appear before the said Competent Authority i.e. District Collector at the first instance on 15.03.2021.
9. With these Observations and Directions and slight Modification of the order of the learned Single Judge, the present Letters Patent Appeal is disposed of. No order as to cost. Consequently, connected Civil Application also stands disposed of."
4. Mr. Majmudar further states that the petitioner is having a valid decree in his favour along with a Will executed by Labhuben - original owner of the land and now the dispute in Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:47:22 IST 2023 NEUTRAL CITATION C/SCA/4499/2023 ORDER DATED: 07/12/2023 undefined respect of land and entitled to pay premium is between the present petitioner and the second line legal heirs of deceased Labhuben. He further states that the Collector, Vadodara may decide the representation that the petitioner may make after hearing all the parties within some reasonable time.
5. As the prayer made by the petitioner is innocuous one and the same is in line with the direction issued by the Division Bench of this Court by judgment dated 16.2.2021 in Letters Patent Appeal No.784 of 2017, the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the Collector, Vadodara within a period of one month from today. Once such representation is made, the Collector, Vadodara may after issuing notice to all the concerned interested parties may hear and decide the issue in line with the directions issued by the Division Bench by judgment dated 16.2.2021 in Letters Patent Appeal No.784 of 2017, as early as possible preferably before 31.7.2024.
6. With the aforesaid direction and observation, the present petition stands disposed of. Direct service is permitted.
(NIRZAR S. DESAI,J) SAVARIYA Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Thu Dec 07 20:47:22 IST 2023