The Gujarat High Court has cancelled an Ahmedabad Collector’s order rejecting a land-use conversion application and directed the authority to decide the matter within the prescribed legal timeframe. The court also imposed a cost of Rs 1 lakh on the Collector for allegedly delaying the decision and repeating reasons that had already been rejected in an earlier order.
The case concerns an application under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code to convert agricultural land for non-agricultural, or NA, use. According to the report, the applicant had earlier approached the High Court after the Collector rejected the application by citing old transactions that did not have approval under Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy Act.
On March 2, 2026, the High Court cancelled that earlier order and directed the Collector to decide a fresh application within 90 days, based on the court’s previous findings. The applicant subsequently submitted another NA application on April 7, 2026, according to the report. The source also refers to an April 11 application while describing the court’s latest directions.
The Collector rejected the application again on August 6, after the 90-day period had expired. The stated reason was that the state government was considering filing an appeal against the High Court’s March 2 order. The court was told that, despite more than seven months having passed, no such appeal had been filed.
The High Court held that, while considering permission under Section 65, the Collector is required to examine the applicant’s possession and the nature of the land. The report says the court found that the Collector did not have authority in that proceeding to reopen questions concerning ownership or older title transactions. The court also criticised the repetition of the same grounds after its earlier order had been cancelled.
The latest order restores the applicant’s NA application to the original file and requires the Collector to decide it within the applicable legal period. The court directed the Collector to deposit Rs 1 lakh from personal funds, described as a cost for allegedly harassing the applicant, in the High Court registry within one month.
The report states that if the amount is not deposited, the state government will make the payment and recover it from the Collector’s salary. After verification of the deposit, the amount is to be transferred electronically to the applicant as litigation costs. The ruling places the administration’s handling of land-conversion applications under direct judicial scrutiny and sets out the next step as a time-bound decision on the restored application.
