Decided on March 09,1988

Bhatt Nayankumar Natwarlal And Others Respondents


P.M.CHAUHAN - (1.)This Special Civil Application is directed against the order by the Government of Gujarat refusing to revoke the certificate granted under Sec 88C Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act (to be referred as `BT&AL Act) and dismissing the application under Sec. 88D BT&AL Act holding that the petitioner tenant has failed to establish that the annual income of the respondent No. 1 landlord is more than Rs. 1500.00.
(2.)The respondent No. 1 is the occupant of Survey Nos. 1944 1940 1114 paiki 1113 situated at Borsad and Survey No. 314/1 situated at Vahera the total area of which is 14 Acres and 13 Gunthas. In an application dated 12/10/1965 under Sec. 88C BT&AL Act the Mamlatdar Borsad granted the certificate on 28/02/1969 under the said provision. Under Sec. 88C BT&AL Act the occupant of the land is required to submit an application to the Mamlatdar within the prescribed period for a certificate that he is entitled to the exemption and the Mamlatdar on holding that the land leased by the occupant does not exceed the economic holding and the annual income of the occupant landlord including rent does not exceed Rs 1500/- may grant the certificate. The order of the Mamlatdar under Sec. 83C being appealable was challenged in appeal but the appeal was dismissed and the revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal was also dismissed. The orders were challenged in Special Civil Application No. 1311 of 1971 under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India in the High Court and that was also dismissed on 8/10/1976 The proceedings under Sec. 88C therefore reached the finality and after that the petitioner submitted an application on 1/05/1978 under the provisions of Sec. 88 for revoking the certificate issued by Mamlatdar under Sec. 88C. Under Sec. 88D BT&AL Act if the State Government is satisfied in the case of the land referred to in Sec. 88C that the annual income of the landlord has exceeded Rs. 1500.00 or that the total holding of such person exceeds the economic holding the certificate granted under Sec. 88C should be revoked.
(3.)The contention of the petitioner was that the annual income of the respondent No. 1 has exceeded Rs. 1500.00 and therefore the certificate should be revoked. Deputy Secretary Revenue Department exercising the power of the Government considered the rival contentions and the evidence and rejected the application holding that the petitioner has failed to establish that the annual income of the respondent No. 1 is more than Rs. 1500.00. Government accordingly has decided on facts that the case for revocation of the certificate is not made out by the petitioner and accordingly dismissed the application under Sec. 88D BT&AL Act.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.