Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Shantaben Jagdishbhai Acharya on 5 April, 2022
Bench: Hemant M. Prachchhak
C/LPA/498/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/04/2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 498 of 2022
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18469 of 2016
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2021
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 498 of 2022
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FIXING DATE OF EARLY HEARING) NO. 1 of 2022
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 498 of 2022
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SHANTABEN JAGDISHBHAI ACHARYA
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS DHWANI TRIPATHI, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MS ARCHANA R ACHARYA for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M.
PRACHCHHAK
Date : 05/04/2022
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.M.CHHAYA)
Order in Appeal:
1. Heard learned advocates appearing for the
parties.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the
order dated 26.07.2019 passed by the learned Single
Judge in Special Civil Application No.18469/16, the
State and its authorities have preferred this
appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent.
3. This proceeding has its genesis in the order
dated 19.08.2016 passed by the Collector, Kutch, in
C/LPA/498/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/04/2022
Appeal/Jaman/108(6)/ Case No. 74 of 2016 with
regard to Revenue Entry No. 8913, which came to be
mutated for the lands in question. As enumerated in
village form no. 7, being Survey No. 1062 Part 1,
situated at village Fatehgadh, Taluka Rapar,
District Kutch. The respondent-original petitioner
contended before this Court that the very
initiation of suo motu proceedings was without
jurisdiction and also contended that the suo motu
action is initiated after a period of 10 years. The
learned Single Judge, by the impugned judgment and
order, observed thus-
"4. Heard learned advocates appearing for
the respective parties. Consideration of
the order impugned would indicate that the
Collector, Kutch has dropped the
proceedings, which were instituted vide
show cause notice dated 22/03/2016
pertaining to the entry in question.
However, the Collector while directing the
Mamlatdar to undertake proceedings with
respect to the petitioner under sections
100 and 122 of Gujarat Tenancy and
Agricultural Land (Vidarbha Region and
Kutch Area) Act, 1958, has assumed liberty
to re-initiate suo moto proceedings with
respect to the entry in question if deemed
necessary.
The contemplation of the Collector by
assuming liberty to reinitiate the suo
moto proceedings with respect to entry in
question, which has been mutated and
certified in the revenue records in the
year 2010, would be opposed to the
position of law as has been settled by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of State of
C/LPA/498/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/04/2022
Gujarat V/s. Raghav Natha and others
reported in AIR 1969 SC 1297. To such
extent, the observation of the Collector
with respect to reserving right to
initiate suo moto proceedings with respect
to an entry mutated and certified in the
year 2010, can be said to be a
contemplation beyond reasonable period
hence, deserves to be interfered with and
accordingly is quashed.
With respect to the directions of the
Collector to the Mamlatdar for initiating
proceedings under sections 100 and 102 of
Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Land
(Vidarbha Region and Kutch Area) Act,1958,
even the same shall be insignificant and
tantamount to causing harassment to the
petitioner owing to the fact that the
petitioner himself and his family members
have been declared as "Agriculturists" by
the competent authority and which
declaration is affirmed by the judgment of
this court and Hon'ble Apex Court.
Considering the fact that there is no
retort from the end of the state
government with respect to the factum of
petitioner and his family members being
agriculturists, the direction of the
Collector to initiate proceedings under
sections 100 and 102 of Gujarat Tenancy
and Agricultural Land (Vidarbha Region and
Kutch Area) Act, 1958 can be inferred as
one without any foundation. Accordingly,
this Court sets aside the said direction
rendered by the Collector. Having set
aside such direction, I do not wish to
enter into the aspect as to whether the
Collector had jurisdiction to issue such a
direction."
4. In similar matters arising out of the same
factual background, the Coordinate Bench of this
C/LPA/498/2022 ORDER DATED: 05/04/2022
Court, vide order dated 23.12.2020 passed in LPA
Nos. 990/20 and 998/20, was pleased to dismiss the
appeal filed by the State. We are in total
agreement with the observations made by the learned
Single Judge. No interference is called for.
Following the judgment and order passed by
Coordinate Bench in LPA Nos. 990/20 and 998/20, the
present appeal also deserves to be dismissed and is
hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.
Order in Civil Application no. 1/21:
As the appeal is dismissed, this application
does not survive and is dismissed accordingly.
Order in Civil Application no. 1/22:
As the appeal is already listed and heard
today, this application does not survive and is
dismissed accordingly.
(R.M.CHHAYA,J)
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
Maulik
