Dayabhai Danabhai Rabari vs State Of Gujarat

     C/SCA/2211/2023                            JUDGMENT DATED: 10/02/2023




             IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

               R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2211 of 2023

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA                              Sd/-
==========================================================
1     Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed               NO
      to see the judgment ?

2     To be referred to the Reporter or not ?                       YES

3     Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy              NO
      of the judgment ?

4     Whether this case involves a substantial question              NO
      of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution
      of India or any order made thereunder ?

==========================================================
                       DAYABHAI DANABHAI RABARI
                                Versus
                          STATE OF GUJARAT
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR K B VIRVADIYA(11272) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. NISHIT P GANDHI(6946) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3,4,5,6,6.1
MR JAYNEEL S PARIKH, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
    CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA

                            Date : 10/02/2023
                            ORAL JUDGMENT

1. Rule. Learned AGP waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of the respondent-State.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following reliefs:

"15(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or Page 1 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 13 20:57:03 IST 2023 C/SCA/2211/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/02/2023 any other appropriate writ, order or directions quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 21.09.2022 passed by Hon'ble the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (at ANNEXURE-G hereto) and further be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a weit in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions directing the respondent - Hon'ble the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal to decide the pending revision application No. TEN/AA/77/2019 as expeditiously as possible within period of 3 months;"

3. The petitioner has filed Revision Application No.TEN/AA/77/2019 before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (Tribunal). The petitioner approached the Tribunal by filing an application seeking early hearing of the matter, which has been rejected by the impugned order dated 21.09.2022 by observing that since the matters from 2019 are already pending, such application cannot be taken up for the final hearing.

4. It is pertinent to note that the dispute is going on since 2002. The petitioner has specifically stated that he is an agriculturist and his only source of income is agriculture and due to pendency of the revision application and the impugned order, the petitioner is unable to obtain any loan from the bank, which causes great prejudice to him for his livelihood. It is stated that due to the financial difficulties, the petitioner is unable to carry out the agricultural activities.

C/SCA/2211/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/02/2023

5. Before rejecting the application of the petitioner for seeking early hearing, the Tribunal was required to consider the difficulties faced by the petitioner. The request of early hearing by the litigant cannot be merely rejected on the ground that earlier matters are still pending. The application filed seeking early hearing is required to be considered in light of the difficulties faced by the litigant. There may be some litigants, who would not be interested in proceeding with their matters however, for the litigant like the present petitioner, who is seeking early hearing of his matter pointing out his/her genuine difficulty, his/her applications are required to be examined in true perspective. The Tribunal is required to apply its mind to the aspects on which a litigant is seeking early hearing and in order to see that the litigant is not made to suffer inordinately or his approaching the Tribunal itself becomes a futile exercise, his request has to be considered sympathetically. The appropriate approach of the Tribunal in this regard would be to examine the genuineness of the difficulties and predicament faced by the litigant before abruptly rejecting the application seeking early hearing on the ground that old cases are still pending. The Tribunal, being the artifact of a statute, is statutorily duty bound to instill confidence and solace to a litigant, who requests to get his Page 3 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 13 20:57:03 IST 2023 C/SCA/2211/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 10/02/2023 matter listed for early hearing due to his personal predicament.

6. Under the circumstances, the impugned order dated 21.09.2022 passed by the Tribunal is hereby quashed and set aside. the Tribunal is directed to decide the application of the petitioner, preferably within a period of 6 (six) months from the date of receipt of writ of the order of this Court.

7. The present writ petition stands allowed accordingly. Rule made absolute.

Sd/-

(A. S. SUPEHIA, J) NVMEWADA Page 4 of 4 Downloaded on : Mon Feb 13 20:57:03 IST 2023