Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kesarbhai Aatabhai Mori, is the owner and occupant of agricultural land admeasuring about 6171 square meters bearing Survey No. 793. A panchnama was drawn on 14.11.2022 by the Circle Officer. The Mamlatdar passed an order dated 31.01.2023 directing the petitioner to open a way through his land. The petitioner appealed, and by order dated 01.09.2023, the Deputy Collector remanded the matter to the Mamlatdar for fresh consideration. During the remand proceedings, a panchnama dated 12.10.2023 was drawn in the presence of the in-charge Mamlatdar. Subsequently, the Mamlatdar took charge and visited the site on 15.12.2023. The Mamlatdar passed an order dated 19.02.2024, reaffirming the earlier order dated 31.01.2023 and again directing the petitioner to open the way. The petitioner challenged this order before the Deputy Collector, who by order dated 30.07.2024 dismissed the appeal and confirmed the Mamlatdar's order. The petitioner then filed the present Special Civil Application before the High Court of Gujarat. The main legal issue was whether the impugned orders were sustainable when the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing. The petitioner argued that the orders were passed in violation of principles of natural justice. The respondents contended that the petitioner was heard. The court analyzed the facts and found that the panchnama dated 12.10.2023 was drawn in the absence of the petitioner and that the Mamlatdar's order dated 19.02.2024 did not record that the petitioner was heard. The court held that the orders were violative of natural justice and quashed both the impugned orders, remanding the matter to the Mamlatdar for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Natural Justice - Right of Hearing - Mamlatdar's Courts Act, 1906 - Sections 5 and 6 - The petitioner, owner of agricultural land Survey No. 793, was directed by the Mamlatdar to open a way through his land. The Deputy Collector in appeal remanded the matter for fresh consideration. On remand, the Mamlatdar passed a fresh order without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Held that the orders are violative of principles of natural justice and are quashed and set aside. (Paras 1-10) B) Mamlatdar's Courts Act, 1906 - Proceedings - Opportunity of Hearing - The Mamlatdar's order dated 19.02.2024 and the Deputy Collector's order dated 30.07.2024 were passed without affording the petitioner a chance to be heard. The panchnama drawn on 12.10.2023 was in the absence of the petitioner. Held that the proceedings are vitiated for non-compliance with natural justice. (Paras 2-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the impugned orders passed by the Mamlatdar and Deputy Collector under the Mamlatdar's Courts Act, 1906, directing the petitioner to open a way through his agricultural land, are sustainable in law when the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed and set aside the impugned order dated 30.07.2024 passed by the Deputy Collector and the impugned order dated 19.02.2024 passed by the Mamlatdar, and remanded the matter to the Mamlatdar for fresh consideration after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.
Law Points
- Natural Justice
- Right of Way
- Mamlatdar's Courts Act
- 1906
- Opportunity of Hearing
- Remand Proceedings
- Panchnama
