VINODKUMAR KANTILAL AJABIYA vs STATE OF GUJARAT
- Court
- Gujarat High Court
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12485 of 2025
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR ORDERS) NO. 1 of 2026
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12485 of 2025
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
✔
==========================================================
VINODKUMAR KANTILAL AJABIYA
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR AMAR D MITHANI(484) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR. JAY TRIVEDI, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
UNSERVED EXPIRED (N) for the Respondent(s) No. 5
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M. K. THAKKER
Date : 29/10/2026
JUDGMENT
Order in Civil Application No.1 of 2026
1. Learned advocate Mr. Amar Mithani submits that
respondent No. 5, being the erstwhile vendor who had
sold the subject land to the petitioner by way of a
registered sale deed in the year 2018, is not a necessary
Page 1 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
party to the present proceedings, particularly when the
proceedings have been initiated by the State
Government in exercise of its suo moto revisional
jurisdiction. In view of the aforesaid submission, the
application is allowed. Respondent No. 5 stands deleted
from the array of respondents in the cause title of the
petition.
Judgment in Special Civil Application No.12485 of 2025
1. This petition is filed seeking the following reliefs: —
“(A) Your Lordship may be pleased to admit and allow the
present petition;
(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set
aside the impugned order dated 25.07.2025 passed in Revision
Application No. 18/2025, passed by the respondent no. 1 and be
pleased to allow the application for interim relief submitted in the
said revision application;
(C) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to stay the
implementation, operation and execution of the order dated
07.03.2025 passed by the Collector, Gir Somnath in Revision
Application No. 24/2024, till the final outcome of the pending
Revision Application No. 18/2025.
(D) Pending, admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition,
Page 2 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
be pleased to stay the implementation, operation and execution of
the order dated 07.03.2025 passed by the Collector, Gir Somnath
in Revision Application No. 24/2024, with all consequential effect;
(E) Be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs as the nature
and circumstances, as the case may require in the interest of
justice;”
2. Heard learned advocate Mr. Amar Mithani appearing for
the petitioner and learned Assistant Government Pleader
Mr. Jay Trivedi appearing for the respondent–State.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Mithani, while assailing the
impugned order, submits that the petitioner and his
family members have been holding the subject
agricultural land for the last 69 years, and the name of
the petitioner and his predecessors has been duly
reflected in the revenue records since the inception of
their possession. It is further submitted that, after a
lapse of approximately six years from the order dated
26.11.2018 passed by the Deputy Collector, the Collector
issued a show-cause notice dated 28.10.2024 under
Section 211 read with Section 108(6) of the Gujarat
Land Revenue Code, 1879. Thereafter, vide order dated
07.03.2025, the Collector, relying upon an ex-parte
Panchnama, proceeded to set aside the order dated
Page 3 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
22.11.2018, on the premise that the possession of the
subject land by the petitioner was not duly established.
Simultaneously, directions were issued to the Deputy
Collector to initiate an inquiry under Section 63 of the
Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act. It is further
contended that the Collector could not have directly
undertaken or concluded the proceedings in relation to
the alleged breach of Section 63 of the Tenancy Act,
inasmuch as the requisite inquiry is required to be
undertaken by the competent authority, i.e. the
Mamlatdar, in accordance with the provisions of the said
Act, with the appropriate statutory appellate and
revisional remedies being available before the Deputy
Collector and thereafter before the competent revisional
authority. Learned advocate further submits that, being
aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner has
preferred revision proceedings before the learned
Special Secretary, Revenue Department (SSRD) and has
also preferred an application seeking interim relief,
which came to be rejected vide order dated 25.07.2025.
It is further submitted that, without initiating and
concluding the requisite inquiry in accordance with law
Page 4 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
and without affording an appropriate opportunity to the
petitioner, the Collector has straightaway proceeded to
conclude that the order passed by the Deputy Collector,
pursuant to which the entry pertaining to the registered
sale deed came to be mutated in the revenue records,
was required to be set aside. It is, therefore, submitted
that the impugned order suffers from legal infirmities
and is unsustainable in the eyes of law. Learned
advocate for the petitioner further submits that, during
the pendency of the revision proceedings before the
learned SSRD, it would be just, proper and equitable to
direct the parties to maintain the status quo with regard
to the relevant revenue entry. It is submitted that, in the
absence of such interim protection, the petitioner would
suffer irreparable loss and injury, and the balance of
convenience also lies in favour of the petitioner. Making
the aforesaid submissions, learned advocate for the
petitioner has urged this Court to allow the present
petition.
4. Learned AGP Mr. Jay Trivedi has opposed the present
petition and submitted that the order passed by the
learned SSRD, whereby the application seeking interim
Page 5 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
relief came to be rejected, is just, legal and proper and
does not warrant any interference by this Court.
5. Having considered the submission made by learned
advocate more particularly with regard to the fact that
the order of the deputy Collector was taken into revision
after delay of six years which would certainly not fall
under the terms of reasonable period. As the impugned
proceedings are pending before the learned SSRD and
submissions which is recorded hereinabove made by the
learned advocate for the petitioner suggests that there is
a prima facie case in favour of the present petitioner. In
that background, in the opinion of this Court, the status
quo is required to be maintained in respect of the
revenue record till the final disposal of the revision
application being No. MVI/HKP/Gir/18/2025.
6. In view of the aforesaid, the present petition stands
disposed of with the aforesaid directions.
7. It is submitted by the learned advocate that the
petitioner has also filed the application for fixing the
early hearing of revision application, the same shall be
decided in accordance with law.
Page 6 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026
C/SCA/12485/2025 JUDGMENT DATED: 29/10/2026
(GJHC240629592025)
8. It is needless to clarify that this Court has not entered
into the merits of the case except to decide the above
petition, therefore the learned SSRD shall decide the
revision application independently without being
prejudiced by the order passed by this Court as well as
after considering the submissions made by both the
parties.
(M. K. THAKKER,J)
NIVYA A. NAIR
Page 7 of 7
Uploaded by MRS. NIVYA ABHAY NAIR(HC01901) on Tue Nov 03 2026 Downloaded on : Tue Nov 03 11:43:18 IST 2026