The petitioners, legal heirs of Bhupatsinh Jivabhai Barad, challenged a series of revenue authority orders that cancelled Revenue Entry No. 1167 relating to agricultural lands (Survey Nos. 153/P and 147/P) in Village Targhadi, District Rajkot, purchased in 1986 under the Saurashtra Gharkhed Tenancy Settlement and Agricultural Lands Ordinance, 1949. The authorities had held the purchase transactions null and void for breach of Section 54 of the Act, but the petitioners argued that the suo motu proceedings were initiated after an inordinate delay of six years from certification of the entry, and that a show-cause notice was issued as late as 2008—22 years after the 1986 transaction. The petitioners relied on the settled legal principle, drawn from Raghav Natha v. State of Gujarat (10 GLR 992), that in the absence of a statutory limitation period, proceedings must be initiated within a reasonable time, ordinarily not exceeding two years. The matter had travelled through multiple rounds of proceedings before the Deputy Collector, District Collector, and the Secretary to the State Revenue Department (SSRD), with the SSRD ultimately declining to entertain the final Revision Application, prompting the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The judgment text provided does not record the final operative order of the High Court, as the text appears to be cut off mid-argument.