BHUPENDRA SHANALAL KACHIAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT
- Disposal
- 38-RULE ABSOLUTE/ALLOWED @ FH
- Bench
- HEMANT M PRACHCHHAK
Holding
The Court directed the Collector to decide the pending application within twelve weeks, without addressing the merits of the case.
Summary
The petitioners, Bhupendra Shanlal Kachia and others, filed a special civil application under Articles 14 and 226 of the Constitution seeking a writ of mandamus directing the Collector (Respondent No.2) to decide their application dated 23‑03‑2023 for prior permission to sell a property, filed under Section 5 of the Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disputed Areas Act, 1991. The petition alleged that the application had remained pending for an inordinate period without any decision. The Court examined the procedural aspect and held that the public authority must be compelled to act within a reasonable time. It therefore issued a direction that the Collector decide the pending application within twelve weeks of receipt of the order, after giving the petitioners a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The Court expressly stated that it did not entertain the merits of the underlying property transfer matter and disposed of the petition on the basis of the procedural direction.
Issues considered
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Collector to decide a pending application for prior permission to sell property under the Gujarat Act.
- Whether the petition under Article 226 is maintainable for the purpose of directing a public authority to act within a reasonable time.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of Indias. Article 14, s. Article 226
Subjects
Judgment
C/SCA/18478/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 18478 of 2023
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
==========================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
No
==========================================================
BHUPENDRA SHANALAL KACHIA & ORS.
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
==========================================================
Appearance:
RUSHABH H SHAH(7594) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2,3,4,5,6
MS DIXA PANDYA AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1, 2
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 28/04/2026
JUDGMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Pandya, learned AGP
waives service of notice of rule for and on behalf of
respondents.
2. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for
the respective parties the matter is taken up for final
hearing.
3. Present petition is filed by the petitioner under Articles
14 and 226 of the Constitution of India r/w the provisions
under Section 5 of the Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of
Immovable Property and Provision for Protection of
Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disputed Areas
Act, 1991 seeking below mentioned relief:-
Page 1 of 3
C/SCA/18478/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026
“7-A. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to admit writ
petition;
B. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of
mandamus, or any writ or order or direction, directing
the Respondent No. 2 authority to allow the application
dated 23.03.2023 made by the Petitioner for transfer of
the subject property, and therefore grant the Petitioners
herein prior permission for sale of the subject property.
Annexure F/1
C. In the alternative, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to issue a writ of mandamus, or any writ or order or
direction, and direct the Respondent no. 2 authority to
consider and decide the application dated 23.03.2023, in
compliance with the provisions of the Act and within a
stipulated time frame as deemed fit by this Hon'ble
Court. Annexine F/1
D. Any other and further relief, as this Hon'ble Court
may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
4. Heard Mr. Rushabh Shah, learned counsel for the
petitioners and Ms. Dixa Pandya, learned AGP for the
respondents.
5. Mr. Shah, learned counsel for the petitioners submits
that the application dated 23.3.2023 made by the
petitioners seeking prior approval for sale of the property
was pending before respondent No.2-Collector. He urges
before the Court to direct the respondent No.2 to decide
the application of the petitioners pending before
respondent No.2 within reasonable time period.
6. On the other hand, Ms. Pandya, learned AGP for the
respondents submits that if the application dated
Page 2 of 3
C/SCA/18478/2023 JUDGMENT DATED: 28/04/2026
23.3.2023 is pending before the respondent No.2, then
the same shall be decided, as per time period fixed by this
Court.
7. I have perused the record of the petition. It appears
from the record that the application dated 23.3.2023
preferred by the petitioners before respondent No.2 is
not decided till today and it is pending before respondent
No.2 since long.
8. In view of the above, the respondent No.2 is hereby
directed to decide the application dated 23.3.2023 made
by the petitioners within period of 12 weeks from the date
of receipt of copy of present order. The respondent No.2,
after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioners and
after considering the submissions made by the
petitioners, shall decide the application in accordance
with law.
9. With the above observations present petition stands
disposed of. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid
extent.
10. It is clarified that this Court has not entered into the
merits of the matter.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
SURESH SOLANKI
Original copy of this order has been signed by the Hon'ble Judge.
Digitally signed by: SURESHKUMAR MOTIBHAI SOLANKI(HC00208), PRINCIPAL PRIVATE SECRETARY, at High Court of Gujarat on 30/04/2026 16:42:35
Page 3 of 3
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.