1. By way of this petition, the petitioner has prayed to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 28.09.1998 passed by the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, Ahmedabad, in Revision Application No. 69 of 1997, whereby the said revision application was dismissed.
2. The short facts of the case are that the land bearing Survey Nos. 124, 218, & 233, admeasuring 10 Acres & 1 Guntha was allotted to the husband of the petitioner in the year 1966. The said land was allotted as new tenure land. The husband of the petitioner expired on 31.01.1994 and thereafter the petitioner is cultivating the said land. As there was breach of the condition of the allotment of the land, Sharat Bhang Case No. 196/90 was came to be filed against the petitioner, before the Deputy Collector. The Deputy Collector, vide order dated 08.10.1990 directed the Mamlatdar to take over the possession of the land in question on the ground that the said land had remained uncultivated for long time. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal being Appeal No. 996/1997 before the Collector, Jamnagar. The Collector, vide order dated 17.04.1997 dismissed the said appeal. Being aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner preferred Revision Application No. 69/97 before the Special Secretary [Appeals] Revenue Department-respondent no. 1 herein. The Secretary [Appeals] respondent no. 1 vide order dated 28.09.1998 rejected the said revision application. Hence, this petition.
3. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the documents on record. The petitioner was granted the land in question in the year 1966 for the purpose of cultivation. However, from the record it appears that the petitioner had not cultivated the said land and the same had remained uncultivated for many years. Therefore, in view of the breach of the condition, the respondent authority had cancelled the grant.
Looking to the facts of the case, and in view of the fact that the petitioner had committed breach of condition of the grant, the authorities below were completely justified in passing the impugned orders.
4. Considering the facts of the case, in my opinion, the respondent authorities were completely justified in passing the impugned orders. I am in complete agreement with the concurrent findings recorded by respondent authorities and hence, find no reason to interfere with the same.
5. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
[K.S.
JHAVERI, J.] /phalguni/ Top