Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Rasikbhai Marghabhai Patel and others, filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order dated 10.10.2024 passed by the Collector, Ahmedabad (respondent no.1) rejecting their application under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code (the Code) for mutation of entry. The Collector rejected the application solely on the ground that civil suits, namely RCS No. 313 of 2024 and RCS No. 44 of 2024, were pending in respect of the subject land. The petitioners, represented by Mr. Sunil S. Joshi, argued that the Collector erred in law as mutation entries under Section 65 are only for revenue purposes and do not determine title. They contended that the pendency of a civil suit does not bar the revenue authority from making a mutation entry if the rights are otherwise clear, and that the Collector should have conducted a summary inquiry under Section 135C of the Code. The respondents, including the Collector, the State (through the Assistant Government Pleader Mr. Jayneel Parikh), and private respondents (represented by Mr. Rashesh H. Parikh and Mr. Tejas P. Satta), supported the impugned order. The High Court, after hearing all parties, held that the Collector's order was unsustainable. The court observed that mutation entries under Section 65 are only for fiscal purposes and do not confer or extinguish title. The pendency of a civil suit does not automatically preclude the revenue authority from making a mutation entry, especially when the authority has the power to conduct a summary inquiry under Section 135C. The court quashed the impugned order and directed the Collector to reconsider the petitioners' application afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, without being influenced by the pendency of the civil suits. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Gujarat Land Revenue Code - Mutation Entry - Section 65 - Pendency of Civil Suit - Revenue authority cannot refuse mutation entry solely on ground of pendency of civil suit without adjudicating rights under Section 135C - Held that the Collector's order rejecting application under Section 65 on ground of pendency of RCS No. 313 of 2024 and RCS No. 44 of 2024 was unsustainable as mutation entry does not confer title and revenue authority must conduct summary inquiry under Section 135C (Paras 4-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Collector was justified in rejecting the petitioners' application under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code for mutation of entry on the ground of pendency of civil suits?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order dated 10.10.2024 passed by the Collector, Ahmedabad, and directed the Collector to reconsider the petitioners' application under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code afresh, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned parties, and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law, without being influenced by the pendency of the civil suits. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Mutation entry under Section 65 of Gujarat Land Revenue Code is not a determination of title
- Revenue authority cannot refuse mutation entry solely on ground of pendency of civil suit
- Section 135C of Gujarat Land Revenue Code provides for summary inquiry for mutation entries
- Civil suit pendency does not bar revenue authority from making mutation entry if rights are otherwise clear.
