Gujarat High Court
Heirs And Lrs Of Deceased ... vs State Of Gujarat Through The ... on 2 February, 2021
Bench: R.M.Chhaya, R.P.Dholaria
C/LPA/407/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 407 of 2018
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3646 of 2018
==========================================================
HEIRS AND LRS OF DECEASED KESHAVLAL PARSHOTTAMDAS & 2
other(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH THE SECRETARY (APPEALS) & 4
other(s)
==========================================================
Appearance:
for the Appellant(s) No. 1.1.1,1.2
MR TRILOK J PATEL(658) for the Appellant(s) No.
1,1.1,1.3,1.4,1.5,1.6,1.7,2,3
MR MANISH M KAUSHIK(5048) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.P.DHOLARIA
Date : 02/02/2021
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA)
1. Heard Mr.Trilok J. Patel, learned advocate for the
appellants, Mr.Manish M. Kaushik, learned advocate for the
respondent no.5 and Mr.Tirthraj Pandya, learned Assistant
Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 to 4.
2. The present appeal arises out of the judgment and order
dated 08.03.2018 rendered by learned Single Judge in Special
Civil Application No.3646 of 2018. The appellants approached
this Court by way of writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of
the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 13.12.2017
passed by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department in
proceedings of revision under Section 108(6-A) of the Gujarat
Land Revenue Rules, 1972. The said Revisional Authority was
pleased to partly allow the revision and remanded the
C/LPA/407/2018 ORDER
proceedings back to the Collector with a specific direction to
decide afresh and while remanding the said proceedings, the
original order dated 03.07.2014 passed by the Collector came to
be set aside. The learned Single Judge relying upon the
judgment of this Court rendered in Letters Patent Appeal No.17
of 1994 decided on 21.12.2009 made following observations in
paragraph nos.5.1 and 6 which read as under:
"5.1 What is held by the Division Bench as above makes a
good precedent, requires to be followed in the facts of the case.
Here also, order is one being remand which is under challenge.
6. Whenever authority remands the matter as it has
happened in the present case, it would not finally determine the
rights of the parties. The authority to whom the case is remanded,
will be deciding anew in accordance with law and on merits. It
could not be said that when the remand is directed, the authority
is required to decide in a particular way only. The matter stands
large open before the authority to whom the case is remanded."
3. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the
respective parties, the District Collector, Ahmedabad is hereby
directed to decide the remand proceedings as expeditiously as
possible preferably by 31.10.2021 after giving opportunity of
being heard to the parties in accordance with law without being
in any manner influenced by any of the earlier orders as well as
present order. Mr. Trilok Patel, learned advocate for the
appellants and Mr. Manish Kaushik, learned advocate for the
respondent no.5 do not invite any reasons as the matter is wide
open before the Collector and accordingly, no reasons are
assigned. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. However,
there shall be no order as to costs.
(R.M.CHHAYA, J)
(R.P.DHOLARIA, J)
TAUSIF SAIYED
