Shakarbhai Kesrabhai Rajput vs State Of Gujarat

A.J. Desai, J

By way of the present petition under Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 21 and 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed as under:

"17(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated 08.04.2019 passed by the respondent-SSRD (At Annexure- G) as well as the order dated 29.09.2018 passed by the respondent-District Collector (At Annexure-E) as well as the order dated 10.12.2015 passed by the respondent-Deputy Collector (At Annexure-D);.

(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition Your Lordships may be pleased to stay further operation, implementation and execution of the impugned order dated 08.04.2019 passed by the respondent - SSRD (At Annexure-G) as well as the order dated 29.09.2018 passed by the respondent-District Collector (At Annexure-E) as well as the order dated 10.12.2015 passed by the respondent-Deputy Collector (At Annexure-D);

(C) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition Your Lordships may further be pleased to direct the respondent-SSRD to decide the application dated 26.04.2019 expeditiously."

By taking me through the impugned order passed by the Secretary, Revenue Department and particularly observations made therein, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that though observations made in favour of the petitioner, revision application was dismissed, which was filed at the instance of the petitioner. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner would submit that as per information published in the website of the authority, revision application filed by the petitioner is shown as allowed whereas in the impugned order, the same is shown as dismissed.

Learned advocate appearing of the petitioner would further submit that in view of the above facts, the petitioner has made an application on 26/04/2019 requesting the Secretary, Revenue Department to modify/clarify his own order, however, no order has been passed till date. Hence, this petition may be allowed.

Having heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my opinion, following order would meet the ends of justice:

"The Secretary, Revenue Department would consider the application dated 26/04/2019 made by the petitioner, after examining his own records and after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. It would be open for the petitioner to challenge the order, if any adverse order is passed in the application submitted by the petitioner dated 26/04/2019."

With the above observations, the present petition is disposed of. Direct service is permitted.