Gujarat High Court
The State Of Gujarat vs Karmabhoomi Enterprise on 30 April, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/601/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 601 of 2020
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7503 of 2016
==========================================================
THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Versus
KARMABHOOMI ENTERPRISE
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. MAITHILI MEHTA, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Appellant(s) No. 1,2
MR. S.N.SOPARKAR, SR. ADV. WITH MR VIMAL A PUROHIT(5049) for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. MRUGESH A BAROT(6709) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI
Date : 30/04/2025
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
Heard Ms. Hetal Patel, the learned Assistant Government
Pleader, for the appellant State.
2. Learned senior advocate Mr. S.N.Soparkar assisted by learned
advocate Mr. Vimal Purohit appeared for the respondent.
3. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order
dated 02.03.2020 passed by the learned single Judge in noticing
that though in the allotment order dated 07.06.2008, there was a
condition of completion of the construction within a period of two
years and for setting up the industry, however, there was a
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/601/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
Government Resolution dated 06.06.2003, whereunder the defaulter
is liable to pay penalty to the tune of 20 times of the assessment
for the first breach, and for the second breach, the defaulter is
required to pay 50 times of the assessment of the land revenue. It
was noted by the learned single Judge that the petitioner was not
given opportunity to take shelter under the provisions of the
Government Resolution dated 06.06.2003 before passing the order
impugned dated 24.08.2011 by the Collector of forfeiting the land-
in-question and vesting it with the State Government on the breach
of Section 79A of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879. It was
further noted by the learned single Judge in paragraph Nos. 10 and
11 as under :-
"10. It is also not in dispute that after the petitioner filed a reply to the
show-cause notice on 19.07.2010, and between the period i.e. 19.07.2010
i.e. the reply filed by the petitioner seeking extension and passing of the
impugned order dated 24.08.2011 by the Collector, the petitioner had
already completed the construction and also installed the concerned
machinery and are carrying the industrial activities.
11. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner has paid full consideration
equivalent to the market price of the land in question as determined by
the District Land Valuation Committee. It is a very vital aspect in the
entire controversy, which has been ignored by the respondent authorities.
It is not the case that the petitioner has been allotted the land on
concessional basis or in charity. The petitioner was in the process of
obtaining necessary funds and after obtaining necessary approval from
the concerned Panchayat, though it may not be required, has forwarded
the Collector alongwith the representation, however, nothing was done
on the representation and finally the impugned orders vesting the land
into the State Government have been passed. "
4. With the above observations, while quashing the order dated
24.08.2011 passed by the Collector, the writ petition has been
disposed of with the directions to the state authorities to examine
the case of the petitioner as per the Government Resolution dated
06.06.2003. It was further directed that in case the petitioner is
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/601/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
ready and willing to pay the penalty, as specified in the
Government Resolution dated 06.06.2003 and if he pays the said
penalty, necessary orders regularising the allotment as per the
initial/original allotment order shall passed to regularise the breach
of condition No.6.
5. We may record that the present appeal has been filed with
the assertion that the panchnama showing that there was no
construction over the land-in-question was drawn on 26.06.2010 by
the Circle Officer, Mundra and thereafter on 05.07.2010 notice
under Section 79A of the Land Revenue Code, 1879 calling upon
the original petitioner for hearing alongwith the necessary
documentary evidences supporting his case on 19.07.2010, was
issued.
6. There is no dispute about the fact and it is stated in
paragraph No. 2.3 of the memo of the appeal that the original
petitioner appeared before the competent authority on 19.07.2010
and pleaded for extension with the contention that he was not in a
position to raise the required constructions, but he would initiate
the construction work at the earliest, as he had obtained
permission from the Gram Panchayat. It is pertinent to note that
the before the order of cancellation of allotment dated 24.08.2011
was passed by the Collector forfeiting the land-in-question, the
petitioner had already completed the constructions and had also
installed the machinery so as to carry out the industrial activities.
This fact of the matter was brought before the Revisional Authority,
which simply ignored the same while affirming the order passed by
the Collector dated 24.08.2011.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/LPA/601/2020 ORDER DATED: 30/04/2025
undefined
7. Having noted the above facts and further that the learned
single Judge has required the State authorities to pass an order of
regularisation of the allotment, in case the petitioner agrees to pay
penalty as per the Government Resolution dated 06.06.2003, which
is required to be computed by the competent authority, we do not
find it a fit case to interfere.
8. No infirmity could be found in the order passed by the
learned single Judge. The appeal stands dismissed, accordingly.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(PRANAV TRIVEDI,J)
C.M. JOSHI
