1. The petitioner, aggrieved from the order passed by the respondent No.2 dated 21.8.1999 whereby respondent No.2 has dismissed the Revision Application preferred by the petitioner under section 211 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, 1879, now called Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879 has preferred the present petition.
2. The petitioner preferred the application for grant of 4047 square meters of land from Survey No.778 of village Sukhpar, Taluka Gariyadhar, District Bhavnagar. The application preferred by the petitioner was rejected by the Collector on 12.3.1991. Thereafter, the State Government directed the Collector to examine whether the land can be granted to the petitioner and on the basis of this direction, the Collector passed the order granting the land to the petitioner at the rate of Rs.13/- per square meter. However, it was ordered that the price was subject to the revision by the Chief Town Planner. Thereafter, the petitioner received communication from the Collector dated 6.7.1994 wherein he was informed that the Chief Town Planner has revised the rate from Rs.13/- to Rs.75/- per square meter and, therefore, the petitioner should make the payment of difference of amount of Rs.2,50,914/- within a period of 20 days.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has applied for allotment of the plot in the year 1991. Number of other similarly situated persons also applied to the State Government during that period. Some of those persons who applied after petitioner have been allotted the plot at the rates between Rs.3 and Rs.13/- per square meter. However, in case of the petitioner, arbitrary condition has been imposed that he will be liable to pay rate if revised by the Chief Town Planner.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further drawn the attention of this Court to the list annexed at page 83 of the file. According to this list, as many as 7 persons have been allotted the plot from the same survey number. One of the persons at serial No.7 Savitaben Rameshbhai Vaghani has been allotted the plot on 13.9.1993 at the rate of Rs.13/- per square meter. This document also shows that the petitioner has been allotted the plot on 1.1.1994 at the same rate i.e. Rs.13/- per square meter; however, rate has been revised to Rs.75/- per square meter, as stated earlier.
5. Mr.Mangukiya contended that the rates taken into consideration by the Town Planner are that of the town and not of the area where the plot was sought to be allotted as the town is situated at the distance of 1.5 kms from this site.
6. Learned AGP has vehemently opposed the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that earlier the dispute between the parties has been set to rest in view of the order passed by the Government and hence, the present petition is not maintainable. It has been further contended that at the time of allotment to the petitioner, there was specific condition that rate will be subject to revision by the Chief Town Planner and he will be liable to pay difference of rate if any revised by the Chief Town Planner. It has been further contended that the Town Planner, while enhancing the price from Rs.13/- to Rs.75/- per square meter, has taken into consideration the situation of the plot, development, potentiality, site condition, size, frontage, level, locality, sale instances and had consultation with the Senior Town Planner.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the file with the help of the learned advocates.
8. There is no dispute that some other similarly situated persons who have applied for allotment much after the application of the petitioner have been allotted the plot at the rate less than that of the petitioner. Along with the petition, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the site plan of the plot in question. A perusal of the said plan shows that the plot of the petitioner is just adjoining to the plot of Khodiya Quarry which has been granted the plot at the rate of Rs.3/- per square meter. Similarly, number of other persons have been granted the plot at the rate much lower than that of the petitioner. The rate of Rs.75/- taken into consideration by the Collector seems to be on higher side as that rate is that of the city and not of the area where the land in question is situated. Even otherwise, there is nothing on file to show that whether Savitaben Rameshbhai Vaghani who was allotted plot with similar condition has been fastened with further liability to pay at the rate of Rs.75/- per square meter. In absence of any reply by the State in this regard, it is presumed that no such enhancement has been demanded from this person.
9. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner drawn the attention of this Court to the report of the Collector. According to which, similarly situated other persons have been allotted the land at the price much less than that of the petitioner. Once it is established that the petitioner has applied along with other persons who have been allotted the land adjoining to that of the other applicants, the petitioner cannot be discriminated in the matter of price by asking him to pay the price 5 - 6 times higher than that what has been charged from other persons. Otherwise also, potentiality of the land cannot increase to 5 – 6 times in a gap of three months as Savitaben has been allotted plot @ Rs.13/- per square meter on 13.9.1993. This Court cannot lost sight of the fact that the petitioner originally applied for plot in the year 1991 and some of the allottees who applied later have been given plot at much lower price.
10. The contention of learned AGP that the Town Planner has taken into consideration the potentiality of the land, size of the plot and other factors cannot be given much weightage in view of the fact that similarly situated other persons have been allotted at much lesser rate than that of the petitioner.
11. Under the circumstances, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and is set aside accordingly by allowing the present petition. Rule is made absolute. No costs.
(Mohinder Pal,J) pathan