MOHANBHAI BHANABHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short facts of the case appears to be that Bhanabhai was holding agricultural land at Village: Aat, Tal.Navsari, District: Valsad. After the death of Bhanabhai, the land by way of inheritance vested to his widow Sonaben as well as the son and daughters of Bhanabhai. As per the petitioner, Sonaben was alive on the appointed day i.e. 1.4.1976 and she expired on 28.1.1977. There were other family members of deceased Bhanabhai inasmuch as the petitioner and his wife, Rekhaben, Amitaben and Nayanaben daughters and Sonaben, widow of Bhanabhai. In all, there were 6 members in the family. It appears that the form was filed by the petitioner under the Gujarat Agricultural Land Ceiling Act (herein after referred to as the Act ). There were earlier proceedings and the matters were remanded and ultimately, Mamlatdar vide order dated 30th September, 1994 found that Sonaben was alive but she had abandoned her right and therefore, she would not be entitled for one unit more and thereafter, the area of 2 Acres and 38 Gunthas was declared as the surplus land. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the Deputy Collector and the Deputy Collector has examined the matter on the aspects that since in one of the revenue entry, it was mentioned that Sonaben had expired on 12.2.1976, no separate unit would be available and therefore, dismissed the appeal. The Tribunal held in the same manner by the order dated 11.6.1999. Under the circumstances, the present petition before this Court.

(2.) I have heard Mr.Mehta learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr.Jayswal learned AGP for the respondents.

(3.) FURTHER on the face of the death certificate dated 19.11.1992; wherein, the death is stated as on 28.1.1977 though there may be any recital in the revenue record, weightage is to be given to the death certificate as against the date of death mentioned in the revenue entry. Had it been a case where no authenticated record was made available for date on which the mother of the petitioner has expired, possibly the Authority could be justified in proceeding the matter. In the revenue record the date of the death of the mother of the petitioner is mentioned but when there was already specific evidence, more particularly, specific certificate under Birth and Death Registration Act, the weightage was required to be given to that evidence for the death of deceased Sonaben, widow of Bhanabhai and aforesaid both the aspects had relevance.