'Casual Filing Of Intra-Court State Appeal Is Misuse Of Public Money': Gujarat HC Directs State's Principal Secy To Frame Guidelines

The matter was being heard by a division bench comprising Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P Mayee.

The Court observed that the intra-court appeal was filed with an unreasonable delay of 481 days to contest the single judge's order, explicitly stating that there was no dispute about the conversion of the land from new tenure to old tenure in 2005.

Additionally, the Court noted that the permission for land conversion, granted by the deputy collector on March 24, 2006, considered various government resolutions from 1996 to 2001 and other relevant documents. It pointed out that the state failed to produce any documentary evidence before the writ court indicating that the conversion order had been set aside.

The Court asserted, "It is thus opined that till the since the order of conversion of the the land that is still in existence the govt resolution dated 10.05.2001 which had made provision for conversion of land from new tenure to old tenure even if any land has been treated as excess land, under the Land Ceiling Act."

"The order passed by the collector and the SSRD refusing to mutate the name of the petitioner based on the sale deed executed in his favour was found to be faulty in as much as it recorded that land in question came under the head of plant ceiling and therefore cannot be sold," the Court added.

The Court found both submissions made by the AGP on behalf of the appellant to be entirely misconceived. The AGP failed to produce any order from the collector disapproving the permission granted by the deputy collector for the conversion of the land in question into old tenure, which the Court specifically inquired about.

Regarding the government resolution dated 04.07.2008, the Court stated that it only had a prospective effect and was irrelevant to the sale deed dated 22.06.2006, executed prior to the enforcement of the resolution. The Court also highlighted that the deputy collector had taken into consideration the relevant government resolutions in force at the time when permitting the land conversion.

The appeal was subsequently dismissed as misconceived. However, before concluding the order, the Chief Justice expressed astonishment at the manner in which intra-court appeals were being filed by state authorities.

She recorded in the order, "We are amazed to see the manner in which the intra court appeals are being filed by the state authorities. It seems that proper opinion of the Government counsels is not sought on merits of the case before taking decision to institute intra court appeal. Even the delayed appeal are being filed regularly and the delay as sought to be explained therein is casual administrative delay in seeking permission to institute the appeal."

"We therefore call upon the Principal Secretary, Law, Govt of Gujarat to look into the matter and to streamline the procedure for filing of the intra court appeal by framing guidelines delaying with the mood and manner of filing such appeals to the effect that such appeals can only be filed only after taking proper opinion of the government pleaders and that too within the time framed prescribed for the purpose," the Chief Justice added.

The Court directed the Principal Secretary to frame guidelines specifying that intra-court appeals could only be filed after obtaining the proper opinion of government pleaders and within the prescribed time frame.

The Chief Justice emphasized the need for a timeline for challenging the decisions of the Single Judge and called for a blueprint of the appeal institution process to ensure the state's interests were not compromised due to the officers' lackadaisical approach.

The Chief Secretary was directed to ensure strict compliance and submit a report to the registrar general of the High Court of Gujarat within four weeks from the order date.