AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ravi R. Tripathi, J.—Heard learned advocate Mr. J.M. Patel for the petitioner.
1.1. Petitioner, Vadodara Swaminarayan Mandir Gavshala Trust, by its Trustees, is before this Court challenging the order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal at Annexure-''C'' in Revision Application No. 1165 of 1979.
The facts of the present case are that, qua Bai Dhuliben widow of Parbatbhai Padhiar, Suo Motu Case No. 2946 of 1977 came up for consideration and after considering all the relevant aspects, the same resulted into dismissal by judgment and order dated 18.11.1978.
2.1. Against that, Tenancy Appeal No. 20 of 1979 was filed, which too came to be dismissed by judgment and order dated 29.9.1979. Against that, Revision Application No. TEN.B.A. 1165 of 1979 came up for consideration before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal and the Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 23.7.1981 quashed the impugned order and remanded the matter to the Mamlatdar to hold fresh inquiry. This order was challenged by filing the present petition, being Special Civil Application No. 4488 of 1984. During the pendency of the petition, the respondent died. The present petitioner filed Misc. Civil Application No. 1643 of 1996, praying for quashing and setting aside the abatement. That Misc. Civil Application came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge by judgment and order dated 24.10.1997. Against that judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, Letters Patent Appeal No. 1624 of 1997 was filed, which came to be allowed by judgment and order dated 28.3.2000.
Learned advocate Mr. Patel invited attention of the Court to the judgment and order passed by the same learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 2335 of 1984 whereby the learned Judge was pleased to allow the Special Civil Application filed by another similarly situated person and was pleased to quash and set aside the judgment and order of the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal in TEN.B.A. 1164 of 1979 and 1165 of 1979. In view of that, the matters stood remanded before the Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal, which was registered as Remand Case No. 780 of 2009. The Mamlatdar, after considering all the relevant aspects of the matter, has rejected the claim of the tenants and has held by its judgment and order dated 25.6.2010 that the land bearing Survey No. 467 Paiki admeasuring 1 Acre 32 Gunthas, bearing No. 461/1 admeasuring 1 Acre 31 Gunthas, and bearing No. 461/2 admeasuring 0 Acre and 04 Gunthas, of Mouje Danteshwar, Taluka and District Vadodara is in the name of ''Gaushala Trust'' and the said Institution has obtained a certificate of exemption u/s 88(B) and therefore, the provisions of Section 88(E) are not applicable to that Institution. Besides, the Mamlatdar has recorded categorical findings that it is not proved that the applicants or their ancestors have ever cultivated this land and were holding possession of the same. The Mamlatdar has further recorded that in the lands in question, there is natural growth of grass and that grass is used in Gaushala. It is also recorded that on 15.11.1969, the applicants did not have possession of the land and today also, the applicants are not in possession of the land. Hence, the price u/s 32-G of the Tenancy Act is not required to be fixed.
Learned advocate Mr. Jayraj Chauhan appearing for the respondent, has no instructions whether the order passed by the Mamlatdar is challenged by the respondent.
In view of the above, the present petition is allowed. The order passed by the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute with no order as to costs.