Jashvantkuvarba and Others vs State of Gujarat and Others

M.R. Shah, J.

Rule. Shri Girish Patel, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 5 and 6. Ms. Trusha K. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of respondent Nos. 1 to 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case and with consent of learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties, present petition is taken up for final hearing today.

A grievance which is voiced in the present Special Civil Application is the action of the Mamlatdar, Danta and/or order passed by the Mamlatdar, Danta dated 16.05.2010 certifying mutation entry No. 370 despite the order of status-quo/stay granted by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat granted in Revision Application No. 50/2008.

It is the case on behalf of the petitioners that despite the fact that the order of status-quo granted by the Revisional Authority in aforesaid Revision Application No. 50/2008 was pointed out and placed before the Mamlatdar, Danta, in utter disregard to the said order granted by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat, Mamlatdar, Danta has certified the mutation entry No. 370 which could not have been certified by Mamlatdar, Danta being subordinate to the Revisional Authority.

In response to the notice issued by this Court, Ms. Trusha K. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader has appeared on behalf of concerned respondent Nos. 1 to 4 inclusive of Mamlatdar, Danta who has passed the impugned order certifying the mutation entry No. 370 despite the order of stay/status-quo granted by the Revisional Authority. Mamlatdar, Danta is also personally present in the Court. An affidavit is filed by the Mamlatdar, Danta tendering unconditional apology for passing the impugned order certifying mutation entry No. 370 despite the order of status-quo/stay granted by the Revisional Authority. It is submitted that the impugned order certifying mutation entry No. 370 is passed by mistake. It is submitted that having realized the mistake, he has already approached the Collector, Banaskantha vide communication dated 27.03.2010 to take his own order dated 16.05.2010 in suo motu revision in exercise of powers under Rule 108(6) of the Gujarat Land Revenue Rules. It is submitted by him that once he has certified the entry, he has no authority or jurisdiction to recall/review his own order and therefore, he has communicated and/or approached the Collector, Banaskantha to take his own order of certifying mutation entry No. 370 in suo motu revision. Ms. Trusha K. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader has fairly conceded that infact Mamlatdar, Danta could not have and ought not to have passed the order of certifying mutation entry No. 370, in view of the order of status-quo/stay granted by the Revisional Authority. It is submitted that the impugned order of certifying mutation entry No. 370 be quashed and set aside and whatever the position prior to passing of the impugned order dated 16.05.2010, be restored. Ms. Trusha K. Patel, learned Assistant Government Pleader has also submitted that Mamlatdar, Danta has tendered his sincere unconditional apology and is also ready and willing to pay the cost, which may be determined by this Court, which shall be paid by him personally.

Shri Girish Patel, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the private respondents has stated that in view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, if the order dated 16.05.2010 certifying mutation entry No. 370 is to be quashed and set aside, in that case, whatever the position prior to the order dated 16.05.2010 and at the time when the learned Revisional Authority granted the order of status-quo/stay, is to be restored.

Having heard learned advocates appearing for respective parties and considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, when there was already an order of status-quo/stay granted by the Secretary (Appeals), Revenue Department, State of Gujarat passed in Revision Application No. 50/2008 and when the aforesaid interim order was pointed out to the Mamlatdar, Danta, Mamlatdar, Danta ought to have stayed his hands and he was not required to proceed further with the matter and he ought not to have passed an order certifying mutation entry No. 370. The aforesaid act and action on the part of Mamlatdar, Danta is in utter disregard to the order of status-quo/stay granted by the Revisional Authority which cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed and set aside.

In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, present petition is entertained and the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Danta dated 16.05.2010 certifying mutation entry No. 370 is hereby quashed and set aside and position which was prevailing prior to the impugned order dated 16.05.2010 certifying mutation entry No. 370 and which was prevailing at the time when the Revisional Authority granted order of status-quo/stay in Revision Application is directed to be restored, which shall be subject to the further order that may be passed by the Revisional Authority and the Revisional Authority may pass appropriate order in accordance with law and on merits and without being in anyway influenced by the present order. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, with exemplary cost which is quantified at Rs. 10,000/- which the Mamlatdar, Danta shall deposit with this Court within a period of two weeks from today and/or shall be paid by the Mamlatdar, Danta from his own pocket. On deposit of the aforesaid amount, Registry is directed to transmit the same to Gujarat High Court Legal Aid Committee.