LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED CHHANAJI RAMTUJIversusTHE STATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 56-DISPOSED AT ADMISSION STAGE
- Bench
- R T VACHHANI
Holding
The order dated 11 May 2026 passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) is quashed and set aside, with a direction to rehear the case solely on the aspect of delay.
Summary
The legal heirs of the deceased Chhanaji Ramtuji filed a special civil application seeking a writ of mandamus to quash an order dated 11 May 2026 issued by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) in Ganot Appeal Case No. 123 of 2024. The petitioners argued that the order was vitiated by procedural delay. The respondents, including the State of Gujarat, did not contest the quashing and suggested that the matter be remanded for fresh consideration limited to the issue of delay. The High Court, after hearing the parties, quashed and set aside the impugned order and directed the respondent to rehear the case solely on the question of delay, without addressing the merits of the underlying dispute. The court emphasized that the authority could consider all contentions in accordance with law and urged expeditious resolution given the age of the matter.
Issues considered
- What is the appropriate remedy for a petition seeking to set aside an order of the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) on the ground of delay?
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to quash the impugned order dated 11 May 2026.
- Whether the matter should be remanded for fresh consideration limited to the issue of delay.
Subjects
Judgment
C/SCA/7576/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/05/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7576 of 2026
==========================================================
LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED CHHANAJI RAMTUJI & ORS.
Versus
THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR HRIDAY BUCH With MR K B VIRVADIYA(11272) for the Petitioner(s) No.
1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,1.5
MR BRIJENSINGH THAKUR, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MR VIMAL A PUROHIT And JALAK PIPALIYA on behalf of MR VISHAL C
MEHTA(6152) for the Respondent(s) No. 4,4.1,5,6,7
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. T. VACHHANI
Date : 22/05/2026
ORAL ORDER
1. By way of filing the present petition, the petitioners have sought
the following reliefs:
“10(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus
or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
or directions quashing and setting aside the impugned order dated
11.05.2026 passed by the learned Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) in
Ganot Appeal Case No. 123 of 2024 (at ANNEXURE-A);
10(B) During the pendency and final disposal of the present petition YOUR
LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay further operation, implementation and
execution of the impugned order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned
Deputy Collector (Land Reforms) in Ganot Appeal Case No. 123 of 2024
(at ANNEXURE-A);”
2. On advance copy, learned AGP waives service of notice for and on
behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2, and 3. Learned advocate for the
respondent Nos. 4 to 7, waives service for and on behalf of respondent
Nos. 4 to 7.
Page 1 of 2
C/SCA/7576/2026 ORDER DATED: 22/05/2026
3. After arguing the matter at length, learned advocate for respondent
Nos. 4 to 7 submitted that he has no objection if the matter is remanded
back to the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Ahmedabad for fresh
consideration of the issue qua delay only, which in fact does not seem to
have been appreciated.
4. Thus, without delving much into the several contentions raised by
the parties, so also as dealt with by the learned Deputy Collector (Land
Reforms), Ahmedabad, and considering the fair submissions advanced by
the learned advocate for respondent Nos. 4 to 7, so also the same having
been acknowledged by the learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3, the
impugned order dated 11.05.2026 passed by the learned Deputy Collector
(Land Reforms) in Ganot Appeal Case No. 123 of 2024 stands quashed
and set aside, with a direction to respondent No. 2 to take up the matter
for hearing afresh on the aspect of considering the issue of delay only.
5. It is made clear that this Court has not entered into the merits of the
matter, and the learned authority would be at liberty to consider all
contentions that may be raised by the parties in accordance with law.
6. Considering the age of the matter, both the parties would solicit
their cooperation to the concerned authority, who in turn would make an
effort to decide the same as expeditiously as possible. Direct service is
permitted today.
(R. T. VACHHANI, J)
MVP
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: MITESH VIJAYBHAI PANCHAL(HCD0065), ENGLISH STENOGRAPHER GRADE TWO CLASS TWO, at High Court of Gujarat on 22/05/2026 12:21:15
Page 2 of 2
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.