ISHWARBHAI MANGALBHAI SOLANKI - SINCE DECEASED THRU L. H. AND REP. vs STATE OF GUJARAT

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10381 of 2017

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:


HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI

==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
ISHWARBHAI MANGALBHAI SOLANKI - SINCE DECEASED THRU L. H.
AND REP. & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR VIJAY N RAVAL(2025) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,2,3,4,5
MR. RAJVI SHAH ASST GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the Respondent(s)
No. 1,2,3
MR SP MAJMUDAR(3456) for the Respondent(s) No. 4.1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI

Date : 15/10/2026

JUDGMENT
1. The present petition is filed under Articles 226 and
227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 by the petitioners
praying for the following reliefs:
(A) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the
nature of mandamus, or any other
appropriate writ or direction and be
pleased to quash and set aside the order
passed by the Deputy Collector, Anand in
case No. 11 of 2012, decided on
10.10.2014 at Ann: and also pleased to
Page 1 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
quashand set aside the order passed by
the Special Secretary (Appeals), Revenue
Department, Ahmedabad in Revision
Application No. 7 of 2014, decided on
4.1.2016 at Ann confirming the order of
the Deputy Collector;
(B) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to
issue a writ of certiorari and a writ in the
nature of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction and be
pleased to call for record and proceeding
of Case No. 11 of 2012, decided by the
Deputy Collector, Anand on 10.10.2014
and also record and proceeding of
Revision Application No. 7 of 2014,
decided by the Special Secretary
(Appeals), Revenue Department,
Ahmedabad in on 4.1.2016 and after
perusing the same be pleased to quash
and set aside the said proceedings and
further be pleased to drop the proceeding
initiated by the authorities under the
Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and
Consolidation of Holding Act, 1947 and
declared that the petitioners have not
committed any breach in purchasing the
said land in question;
(C) Pending admission hearing and final
disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court
may be pleased to stay the execution,
implementation and operation of
thejudgment and order passed by the
Deputy Collector, Anand, in Case No. 11
of 2012, decided on 10.10.2014 and order
passed by the Special Secretary
(Appeals), Revenue Ahmedabad in
Revision Application No. 7 of 2014,
Department, decided on 4.1.2016 and
Page 2 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
further be pleased to restrain the
respondents, their agents and servants
from interfering with the possession and
ownership of the petitioners over the land
situated in block No. 58 of village
Dedarda, Tal. Borsad, Dist. Anand,
admeasuring 00-60-70 Hectare;
(D) This Hon'ble Court may be please to
grant any other and further relief/s as
deemed just and proper in the interest of
justice;
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Vijay Raval for learned
advocate for the petitioners and learned AGP Ms. Rajvi Shah
for the respondent – State and learned advocate Mr. S.P
Majmudar for the respondent 4.1.
3. Brief facts of the case are as follows:
3.1. The land bearing Block No.58 admeasuring 1-24-44
Are Sq. Mts. situated at Village Dedarda, Taluka & District
Anand, owned by Surjben Shanabhai Solanki and
Bhalabhai Shanabhai Solanki, out of which land
admeasuring 0-6070 Hect. Sq. Mts. was sold to the father of
the petitioners by registered Sale Deed No.74 dated
11.01.2007, entry of sale deed was mutated as Entry
No.2503 dated 26.08.2009 and certified on 30.10.2009.
Page 3 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
Thereafter, the learned Collector, Anand initiated
proceedings under the provisions of the Bombay Prevention
of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947
and the revenue authorities cancelled the said entry on the
ground that the sale creates a fragment. The said order was
confirmed by the Deputy Collector vide order dated
10.10.2014, against which the petitioners preferred Revision
Application No.7 of 2014 before the learned SSRD (Appeals),
Ahmedabad, which came to be rejected by order dated
04.01.2016 confirming the order of the Deputy Collector.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
order, petitioners are before this Court by way of present
petition.
5. Learned advocate for the petitioner contended that the
intiation of the proceedings by invoking provisions of
Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of
Holdings Act, 1947 is nothing by an abusive action. Learned
advocate for the petitioners, at the outset, has placed
Page 4 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
reliance upon the Government Ordinance No. 2/2026
passed by the Revenue Department, Sachivalaya,
Gandhinagar, dated 14.07.2026 and contended that by
amending Section 9 of the Gujarat Prevention of
Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947
(hereinafter, referred to as “the Act” ), any transfer or
partition of a land contrary to the provisions of the Act made
on or after 29.01.1948 but on or before 31.03.2026 shall be
deemed to have been regularized without charging any
penalties or premium and all pending proceedings before
any authority shall abate. It is contended by learned
advocate for the petitioners that in the present case,
cancellation of mutation entry is on the ground that the sale
of the land in question resulted in fragment of block
without obtaining prior permission of the learned Collector
as contemplated under the Act. It is therefore, submitted
that in view of aforesaid amendment in the Act, the present
petition deserves to be allowed by quashing and setting
aside the order dated 04.01.2016 passed by the learned
SSRD in Revision Application and order dated 10.10.2014
Page 5 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
passed by the learned Deputy Collector, Anand. Except
above, no other submissions were made by learned advocate
for the petitioners.
6. Per contra, learned AGP Ms. Rajvi Shah for respondent-
State could not contradict the aforesaid facts and contended
that Sub-Section(4) has been inserted in Section 9 of the
Act. Except above, no other submissions were made by
learned AGP for respondent State.
7. Having considered the submissions made by learned
advocates for the parties and upon perusal of the papers
placed on record, it appears that the challenge in the
present petition is against the order dated 04.01.2016
passed by the learned SSRD whereby the Revision
Application filed by the petitioners came to be rejected by
confirming the order dated 10.10.2014 passed by the
learned District Collector, Anand. The petitioners, having a
registered sale deed dated 13.10.2009 in respect of the land
in question, had the sale deed entry certified in the revenue
Page 6 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
records on 30.10.2009 vide Entry No. 2503. The entry came
to be rejected by the learned Deputy Collector, Anand vide
order dated 10.10.2014 by holding that the sale is of a
fragment land. Learned SSRD also affirmed the finding of
learned Collector and rejected the Revision Application of
petitioners.
8. Sub-section(4) has been inserted in Section 9 of the
Act. Sub-section (4) of the Act is reproduced hereunder:
"(4) Notwithstanding anything contained
in this Act, a transfer or partition of a land
contrary to the provisions of this Act made
on or after the 29th January, 1948 but on
or before 31st March, 2026 shall be
deemed to have been regularised without
charging any penalties or premium
therefor and all pending proceedings
before any officer or authority in respect of
the aforesaid transfer or partition shall
abate.".
9. The provision mandates that any transfer of land
which was contrary to the provisions of the Act made on or
after 29.01.1948 but on or before 31.03.2026 shall be
deemed to have been regularized without charging any
Page 7 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
penalties or premium and all pending proceedings before
any Officer or Authority in respect of a transfer shall stand
abated. In view of aforesaid provision of law, the sale deed is
indisputably falling within the aforesaid two dates of
29.01.1948 and 31.03.2026. Therefore, the transfer of land
is deemed to have been regularized without charging any
penalties or premium.
10. It also appears from the record that no proceedings are
pending before any authority dealing with the question of
breach of provisions of the Act, and therefore, the question
of abatement of such proceedings do not arise in the present
case. In the present case, the entry of sale deed was
cancelled on the ground of the sale being violative of the
provisions of the Act as there was no prior permission
obtained by the private parties before entering into a
transaction of sale.
11. In view of the aforesaid amended provision, the present
petition deserves to be allowed and the same is hereby
Page 8 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026

C/SCA/10381/2017 JUDGMENT DATED: 15/10/2026
(GJHC240494012017)
allowed. The order dated 04.01.2016 passed by the learned
SSRD in Revision Application and the order dated
10.10.2014 passed by the learned Deputy Collector, Anand
are, hereby quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute
accordingly.
(D. M. DESAI,J)
MARY VADAKKAN
Page 9 of 9
Uploaded by MARY VADAKKAN(HC00204) on Fri Oct 23 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Oct 23 12:35:06 IST 2026