- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
DANABHAI GOVINDBHAI PARMAR v. STATE OF GUJARAT
C/SCA/10206/2018 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10206 of 2018
==========================================================
DANABHAI GOVINDBHAI PARMAR
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT
========================================================== Appearance:
MR VIJAY H NANGESH(3981) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 2
ADVANCE COPY SERVED TO GOVERNMENT PLEADER/PP(99) for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.L. SONI
Date : 30/08/2018
ORAL ORDER
1. The petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order dated 15.03.2017 passed by the Collector in Land/3/Remand/38 of 2014 and confirming order dated 28.02.2018 passed by the Secretary, Revenue Department (Dispute), Ahmedabad in Revision Application No.JMN/GIR/22 of 2017 filed by the petitioner.
2. As could be noticed from the facts stated in the impugned orders, the petitioner applied for allotment of 2 Acres of land from the land bearing survey No.1125 situated at Village- Prabhash Patan on the ground that such land is adjacent to his other land bearing survey No.1119 paiki ad-measuring 5-18 Gunthas. As observed by the Collector and the Secretary in the impugned orders, the land bearing survey No.1125 from which the petitioner has asked for allotment of 2 Acres of land is Gauchar land.
3. The Collector has rejected the demand of the petitioner for allotment of the above land on finding that the land bearing survey
Page 1 of 3
No.1119 paiki as also the land bearing survey No.617 paiki, which are stated to be as adjacent to land bearing survey No.1125 (Gauchar land), are not of the ownership of the petitioner and that the petitioner has lands of different nine survey numbers ad- measuring total 11-65-42 Hectare-Are-Sq.m.
4. Learned advocate Mr.Nangesh appearing for the petitioner submitted that the land bearing survey No.1119 paiki and 617 paiki stand in name of his brother as eldest member of joint family wherein the petitioner enjoys ownership right. Mr.Nangesh submitted that the portion of the land ad-measuring 2 Acre demanded by the petitioner from survey No.1125 is in fact a separate piece of the land touching to the lands of survey Nos.1119 paiki and 617 paiki belonging to the family of the petitioner and has not been used for the purpose of grazing cattle. Mr.Nangesh submitted that the Collector as also the Additional Secretary has rejected the application of the petitioner for allotment of the land for reasons not germane to decide the question of allotment of the Government land.
5. Learned AGP Ms.Nisha Thakor appearing on advance copy on the other hand submitted that as observed by the Collector and the Secretary, no allotment from the Gauchar land is permissible as per the direction issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. She submitted that the petitioner is not in a position to dispute that he holds large chunk of lands in other nine survey numbers and the person like the petitioner who holds such large chunk of lands could not be made entitle to allotment of 2 Acres of land from Gauchar land and, therefore, the Collector as also the secretary have committed no error in not acceding the request of the petitioner for allotment of land from the Gauchar land.
Page 2 of 3
6. The Court, having heard learned advocates, finds that as observed by the authorities below, the two lands being survey No.1119 paiki and 617 paiki do not stand in the name of the petitioner. Though, it is a case of the petitioner that such lands belong to joint family with his eldest brother, however, the fact remains that as on today, those lands do not stand in the name of the petitioner.
7. Be that as it may, when specifically asked to learned advocate Mr.Nangesh whether the petitioner holds lands in other nine survey numbers to the extent of 11-65-42 Hectare-Are-Sq.m, Mr.Nangesh could not dispute that the petitioner holds such large chunk of lands. The demand made by the petitioner is from the Gauchar land. There is otherwise scarcity of the Gauchar land and as pointed out by learned AGP, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has issued direction not to allot lands from the Gauchar land.
8. In above view of the matter, the Court finds that the authorities below have rightly not acceded to the demand made by the petitioner for allotment of 2 Acres of land from the Gauchar land. Therefore, no error could be found in the impugned orders made by the Collector and the Secretary. Hence, no interference is called for in the impugned orders by this Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition is, therefore, rejected.
(C.L. SONI, J)
GUPTA*
Page 3 of 3
Alert