ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)
Having heard the learned counsel for the appellants and perused the record, suffice it to note that the original petitioners/appellants herein claiming to be the occupiers of the land-in-question, had participated and lost in the proceedings for declaration of the land as surplus, which was drawn against the original owners. It is an admitted fact of
Page 1 of 3
the matter that the appellants are not the original owners of the land-in-question, they, however, participated, claiming to be the occupiers, in the proceedings of declaration of the land-in-question as surplus.
2. The learned single Judge categorically records that the petitioners have no right to seek any liberty or leverage to retain the possession of the land-in-question when vesting is complete with the declaration of the land-in-question as surplus.
3. In view of the said findings returned by the learned single Judge, which could not be assailed before us, the innocuous prayer made by the learned counsel for the original petitioners to permit the appellants/original petitioners to retain the possession of the land-in-question till the allotment proceedings in accordance with Section 30 of the Gujarat Agricultural Lands Ceiling Act, 1960 are completed, is wholly misconceived.
4. The original petitioners/appellants herein, who claim to have retained the possession of the land-in-question for more
Page 2 of 3
than 12 years after conclusion of the proceedings under the Ceiling Act upto the Apex Court, are unauthorised occupant. No indulgence, therefore, can be granted in favour of the appellants/original petitioners.
5. For the above, the appeal stands dismissed being devoid of merits. The Civil Application for stay stands disposed of.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(D.N.RAY,J)
C.M. JOSHI
Page 3 of 3