Bombay High Court
Jagdish Keshavnath Bondarde vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 25 April, 2016
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
1 WP-2541.14
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2541 OF 2014
Jagdish Keshavnath Bondarde,
Age: years, Occu. Business,
R/o: Shiradhon, Tq. Kallam,
District: Osmanabad. ...PETITIONER
versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through the Secretary,
Department of Revenue and Forest
Mantralaya, Fort, Mumbai.
2.
The Divisional Commissioner,
Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad.
3. The District Collector, Osmanabad,
District Osmanabad.
4. The Sub - Divisional Officer,
Kallam, Tq. Kallamb,
District : Osmanabad.
5. The Tahasildar, Kallamb,
District Osmanabad.
6. The Talathi, Shiradhon,
Tq. Kallam, Dist. Osmanabad. ...RESPONDENTS
.....
Mr. P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate holding for
Mr. R.D. Raut, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. S.P. Sonpawale, AGP for respondents - State Authorities
.....
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
DATED : 25 th APRIL, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT :-
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel
for the parties finally, with consent.
2 WP-2541.14
2. Mr. Katneshwarkar, learned counsel for petitioner submits that
the petitioner is 60% physically handicapped and necessary certificate
to that effect issued by the Civil Surgeon, Osmanabad is also placed on
record. According to learned counsel, the petitioner is economically
poor person and he does not have any immovable and movable
properties or any estate.
3. Pursuant to section 43 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal
Opportunities Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for
short "Act of 1995"), the State of Maharashtra has promulgated
scheme on 26th April, 2001 for physically disabled persons in tune with
scheme applicable to Ex-service man, Government Servants etc.
wherein without auction, provision was made for allotment of land to
the extent of 200 Sq. feet to the disabled persons to run Juice Centre,
Telephone Booth and Xerox Centre.
4. According to learned counsel, since 1988 the petitioner was
applying consistently for allotment of plot for running Xerox Centre.
Pursuant to application, the Collector and Tahsildar had taken steps
and the respondents - authorities intended to allot the land
admeasuring 20 x 20 sq. feet in survey No. 214 of village Shiradhon
Ta. Kallam. Even Panchanma to that effect was drawn by Talathi on
30-03-2003. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner has deposited the
amount of Rs.7400/- towards cost of the plot under challan dated
15-03-2004, however, subsequently no steps were taken by the
respondents - authorities for allotment of said plot though petitioner is
consistently representing to the respondents - authorities.
3 WP-2541.14
5. Learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that
subsequently in view of judgment of the Apex Court in the case of
Jagpal Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others reported in (2011) 11
Supreme Court Cases, 396 the policy has been changed and it is decided
not to allot the land of Gairan for any private purpose. In view of
Government Resolution dated 12-07-2011, it was decided that the plot
in Gairan land cannot be allotted to the petitioner.
6. We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned
counsel for the parties. It is not in dispute that since 1988 the
petitioner was consistently making the representations with
respondents - authorities for allotting the plot to him to run Xerox
Centre etc. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is physical
disabled person. It is also not in dispute that Panchnama was
conducted by the Talathi in respect of plot admeasuring 20 x 20 sq.
feet in respect of land survey No. 214 of Shiradhon, Ta. Kallam. There
is some dispute about depositing of amount of Rs. 7400/- by the
petitioner towards cost of the plot. It is for the authority concerned to
confirm the same. The fact remains that panchnama was effected
pursuant to the application of the petitioner for allotment of plot for
running some business i.e. Xerox Centre/Juice Centre etc. on
30-03-2003. Even Further process was also conducted, except
allotment of plot. As such, the petitioner and respondents were
governed by Government Resolution dated 26-04-2001. It is not
shown by the respondents-authorities that some Government land is
available. Respondents - authorities did not take any decision on the
4 WP-2541.14
application of the petitioner for allotment of plot. Almost fifteen years
have lapsed.
7. Considering the above, we pass the following order.
Respondents - authorities shall allot the land of which
panchnama was effected on 30-03-2003 (Exhibit-F), if
same is available, to the petitioner, on petitioner making
necessary compliance with regard to payment of cost etc.
as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of
six months from the date of order.
8. Writ petition is allowed in aforesaid terms. Rule is made absolute
accordingly. No cost.
Sd/- Sd/-
[ K. K. SONAWANE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
MTK
