Umesh S/O Vasantrao Poreddiwar vs The Additional Commissioner, ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 7601 Bom

     Judgment                                           1                                wp2655.15.odt




                                                                                    
                      
                         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                                   NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                            
                               WRIT PETITION NO. 2655  OF 2015




                                                           
     Umesh S/o. Vasantrao Poreddiwar, 
     Aged about 52 years, Occupation :
     Agriculturist, Resident of Rampuri
     Ward, Camp Area, Dhanora Road, 




                                             
     Gadchiroli, District : Gadchiroli.

      
                              ig          //  VERSUS //
                                                                            ....  PETITIONER.
                            
     1.       The Additional Commissioner, 
              Nagpur Division, Nagpur. 
      

     2.       The Collector, Gadchiroli,
              District : Gadchiroli.
   



     3.       Sub-Divisional Officer, 
              Gadchiroli, Tahsil and 
              District : Gadchiroli. 





     4.       The Tahsildar, Gadchiroli,
              Tahsil & District : Gadchiroli.

     5.       The Pradnya Pratishthan, 
              Bezanbagh, Nagpur through 





              the President, Dr. Smt. Maya 
              Ramdasji Bramhane, R/o. Prasad
              Hospital, 5 Parsodi Layout, Near 
              I.T. Park, (Shrinagar Layout),
              Nagpur. 
                                                               .... RESPONDENTS
                                                                                 . 
      ___________________________________________________________________
     Shri R.J.Mirza, Adv. h/f. Shri J.J.Chandurkar, Advocate for Petitioner.   
     Ms Ritu Kalia, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. 
     Shri R.V.Gaikwad, Advocate for Respondent No.5.  
     ___________________________________________________________________




    ::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2016                            ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2016 01:10:08 :::
      Judgment                                               2                                wp2655.15.odt




                                                                                        
                                  CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : DECEMBER 22, 2016.

ORAL JUDGMENT :

1. Heard.

2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3.

The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the

Additional Commissioner on 13th April, 2015 by which the delay in

preferring the review application by the Collector is condoned and the

application filed by the present respondent No.5 seeking permission to

intervene in the proceedings is allowed. The learned Additional

Commissioner has not recorded any reasons for condoning the delay and for

allowing the intervention application. The impugned order is unsustainable

for want of reasons.

4. Hence, the following order :

                       i)      The impugned order is set aside.



                       ii)         The matter is remitted to the Additional Commissioner 

                       for   considering   the   matter   afresh.     The   learned   Additional 





      Judgment                                              3                                wp2655.15.odt




                                                                                       

Commissioner shall consider the objections raised by the party/

parties for condoning delay as well as for permitting the

present respondent No.5 to participate in the proceedings and

pass reasoned order. The parties undertake to appear before

Additional Commissioner, Nagpur on 30th January, 2017 at

11.00 a.m. and abide by further orders in the matter.

The writ petition is allowed in the above terms. In the

circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.

JUDGE

RRaut..