Ahmedabad: Gujarat High Court has imposed a fine of Rs 1 lakh on the Ahmedabad district collector for disregarding its earlier directions while considering a farmer’s application for non-agricultural (NA) permission.The court directed the collector to deposit the amount with the court registry. If the payment is not made, the govt must deduct the amount from the collector’s salary and pay it to farmer Bhumika Rao as compensation for the hardship caused.The order came after the collector rejected Rao’s application for the second time on grounds that were substantially similar to those already rejected by the HC. Justice M K Thakker observed that the collector appeared to regard himself as a “super power authority” who could act according to his own whims and wishes.Rao had applied under Section 65 of the Gujarat Land Revenue Code, 1879, seeking permission to convert her agricultural land for non-agricultural use. The collector rejected her first application, submitted on Dec 19, 2024, on Feb 11, 2025.The rejection cited questions over compliance with Section 63 of the Gujarat Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act in earlier land transactions and whether Rao qualified as a farmer.In March 2026, the HC quashed that rejection. It clarified that while examining an application under Section 65, the collector was required to consider whether the applicant was the occupant of the land and whether it was held or being used for agricultural purposes.The court also made it clear that proceedings under Section 65 could not be used to adjudicate questions relating to land title.Rao filed a fresh application for NA permission in April 2026. However, the collector rejected it again in Aug, relying on adverse reports from revenue officials, earlier land transactions and provisions of the Tenancy Act.Rao then approached the HC once more.Justice M K Thakker noted, “This is not the first instance where the collector has acted as a superpower authority and considering himself as a person, who can act according to his own whims and wish. The litigants are relegated to the same authorities under the expectation that wisdom would prevail with the collector and they would act in accordance with law.”The HC quashed the second rejection order and expressed concern over the administration’s failure to follow the guidelines laid down in its earlier judgment on NA applications. The court said, “In the opinion of this court, every person is required to respect and obey the orders of the court with due dignity for the institution. The govt departments are no exception to it… Flagrant violation of the court’s order would reflect the attitude of the officer concerned to undermine the authority of the courts, their dignity and the administration of justice. In the case at hand, the court is drawing such an inference against the officer, viz. the collector.”
