(1) Heard Ms.Sonal D. Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioners, Ms.Nisha Thakor, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2, and Ms.Seema J. Kothari, learned advocate appearing for respondent Nos.3 to 9.
(2) By way of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs:
"a) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside the order dated 16.08.2001 passed in revision application no.TEN/BS/27/2002 by the learned Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and declare the the petitioners are entitled to four units and the petitioners do not hold land in excess of the ceiling limit.
b) Pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, the implementation, execution and/or operation of the order dated 20.11.2001 passed in ceiling Appeal No.1/96 at Annexure-F and the order dated 16.08.2011 passed in Revision no.TEN/BS/27/2002 may be stayed and respondent No.1 & 2 may be restrained from taking possession of excess land admeasuring 52 acres and 26 gunthas."
(3) Considering the order impugned passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal (the Tribunal) in Revision Application No.TEN/BS/27/2002 dated 16.08.2011 whereby the Tribunal has recorded that the order passed by Mamlatdar & Agricultural Land Tribunal, Valsad i.e. respondent No.1 herein dated 13.11.1995 as well as the order passed by Deputy Collector, Valsad in Appeal No.1 of 1996 dated 20.11.2001 are passed without following basic principles of natural justice as well as without giving opportunity of adducing evidence to the petitioners in particular and, therefore, the Tribunal has been pleased to allow the revision application partly by quashing and setting aside the aforesaid orders and remanding the proceedings.
(4) Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties this Court is of the opinion that interest of justice would be served if the first authority i.e. Mamlatdar & ALT, respondent No.1 herein, who is seized of the matter, is directed to hear the original Ceiling Remand Case No.18 of 1995 remanded before it as per the directions issued by the Tribunal under the order impugned.
(5) Considering the fact that the petitioners claimed their right in the property in question as heirs of deceased Kantilal Hirabhai Patel who, according to the petitioners, the eldest son of Haribhai and also taking into consideration the fact that the issue is pending since 1992, Mamlatdar & ALT, Valsad, respondent No.1 herein, is directed to hear, dispose of and pass an appropriate order in the aforesaid proceedings pending before him, after giving opportunity of being heard to all the parties concerned, including the petitioners as well as giving opportunity to all the parties concerned, including the present petitioners to adduce evidence, as early as possible, not later than 31.12.2012.
(6) Ms.Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioners, as well as Ms.Kothari, learned advocate for respondent Nos.3 to 9, assure this Court that the parties shall co-operate with the proceedings before respondent No.1.
(7) In view of the above, respondent No.1 is hereby directed to fix the hearing of the proceedings pending before him within a period of 15 days from the receipt of this order and issue notice for the date of hearing and dispose of the same as directed above.
(8) It would be open for the parties to take all the contentions that are available under the law. It is also worthwhile to note that the impugned order is as such in favour of the petitioners and, therefore, this Court has not dealt with the merits of the case and respondent No.1 authority shall decide the proceedings pending before him without being influenced by this order.
With these observations the petition is disposed of. Liberty to revive in case of difficulty. NOTICE discharged. There shall be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
[R.M.CHHAYA, J ] *** Bhavesh* Top