KANTILAL RAVJIBHAI DUDAKIYAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT

     C/SCA/370/2026                           ORDER DATED: 16/01/2026




       IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

        R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 370 of 2026

=============================================
                      KANTILAL RAVJIBHAI DUDAKIYA
                                 Versus
                        STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
=============================================
Appearance:
MR DHAVAL VYAS, SENIOR COUNSEL with MS POONAM M
MAHETA(11265) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ANGESH A PANCHAL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2
=============================================

 CORAM:HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI

                          Date : 16/01/2026

                             ORAL ORDER

1.    Heard Mr. Dhaval Vyas, learned Senior Counsel appearing

with Ms. Poonam M. Maheta, learned advocate appearing for

the petitioner and Mr. Angesh A. Panchal, learned AGP

appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2.


2.    By way of present petition, the petitioner herein has

challenged the impugned order dated 23.12.2025 passed by

the learned Special Secretary, Revenue Department (Appeals),

Ahmedabad, whereby, the learned SSRD declined to restore

the status quo ante and retrospectively legitimized the

coercive sealing action undertaken by the Officers subordinate

to the Collector, at Gir Somnath on 11.12.2025.



                                Page 1 of 4
      C/SCA/370/2026                                   ORDER DATED: 16/01/2026




3.     Mr. Dhaval Vyas, learned Senior Counsel appearing for

the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the lawful holder

and occupant of the land bearing Survey No.7/paiki-3, situated

at Village : Chitrod, Taluka : Talala, admeasuring 0-80-94 Hec..

It is submitted that such exercise undertaken by the Officers is

an exercise which is not in consonance with the order passed

by     the        learned    Collector,        dated       26.04.2021,           in

No.Land/1/sharatbhang/18/2020 wherein, in exercise of powers

under Section 66 of the Code, 1879 for breach of condition, by

the impugned order, the direction is issued for demolition of

the premises, which was carried in revision before the learned

SSRD being No.MVV.JMN/GIR/13/2021. It is submitted that the

learned SSRD by the interim order dated 31.07.2024 issued an

order of status quo. It is further submitted that the said order

could not be extended since the matter could not be taken up

for hearing. It is submitted that subsequently, the order passed

by the learned Collector, came to be stayed by the order dated

23.12.2025 however, the effect is given prospectively. In view

thereof, in the interregnum period, the subject premise stands

sealed. It is submitted that in absence of any order of sealing

the   premises, the         impugned      action   undertaken            by the



                                 Page 2 of 4
     C/SCA/370/2026                        ORDER DATED: 16/01/2026




respondent authority is such that the same is required to be

interfered with. It is submitted that it was not because of any

lapse on the part of the parties that the order of status quo

could not be extended.


4.    Mr. Angesh A. Panchal, learned AGP appearing for the

respondents submits that the premises came to be sealed

considering the fact that the order of status quo dated

31.07.2024 was not extended.


5.    Having heard the learned advocates appearing for the

respective parties, as submitted by Mr. Vyas, learned Senior

Counsel that the subject premises are sealed, in the opinion of

this Court, is an exercise which is in excess of the powers

considering the fact that the impugned order passed by the

Collector, dated 26.04.2021, directs the demolition of the

premises exercising powers under Section 66 of the Gujarat

Land Revenue Code, 1879. In the interregnum period, the

order passed by the Collector stands stayed. Though it is not in

dispute that the order of status quo could not be extended

however, in the opinion of this Court, non-extension of status

quo could not have resulted in sealing of premise. Such action

appears to be without any authority under the law and without


                            Page 3 of 4
          C/SCA/370/2026                                                      ORDER DATED: 16/01/2026




 issuance of any notice and is such that the same is required to

 be interfered with. It is also not in dispute that by order dated

 23.12.2025, the order passed by the Collector stands stayed

 with prospective effect.


 5.1       In view of above, without interfering with the impugned

 order, in the interest of justice, if the premises are sealed, the

 seals be reopened by the respondent authorities upon receipt

 of this order with immediate effect.


 6.        In light of the aforesaid, Mr. Dhaval Vyas, learned Senior

 Counsel appearing for the petitioner does not press the further

 reliefs, as prayed for, in the present petition.


 7.        With the aforesaid, the present petition is disposed of.


           Direct service is permitted.


                                                                  (VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI,J)


 NEHA




Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: NEHA CHANDRESHKUMAR PRAJAPATI(HC01404), STENO GR II, at High Court of Gujarat on 16/01/2026 18:17:53




                                                    Page 4 of 4