Bombay High Court
Smt. Anusayabai Shankarrao Patil vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 29 July, 2016
Bench: Z.A. Haq
1 wp3545.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.3545/2016
Smt. Anusayabai Shankarrao Patil,
aged about 94 Yrs., R/o Barakholi,
Indora Nagar, Nagpur. ..Petitioner.
..V/s...
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary, Revenue
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32.
2. Collector, Nagpur.
3. Additional Collector, Nagpur.
4. Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagpur.
5. Nazul Tahsildar, Nagpur.
6. Regional Director, RTO, Nagpur.
7. Zilla Sainik Welfare Board
Civil Lines, Nagpur. ..Respondents.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shri Y.B. Mandpe, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri K.R. Lule, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 6.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.
DATED : 29.7.2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Shri Y.B. Mandpe, Advocate for the petitioner and Shri K.R. Lule,
A.G.P. for the respondent Nos.1 to 6. None appears for the respondent No.7 though
served.
2 wp3545.16
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
3. The petitioner has filed appeal before the Additional Collector challenging
the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer by which the appeal filed by the
petitioner is disposed directing the petitioner to remove his encroachment from the
land. In this appeal, the learned Additional Collector granted an interim order on
25th January, 2016, however, the application filed by the petitioner on 21 st June, 2016
for continuation of interim order is rejected. The petitioner has approached this
Court with the limited prayer that the possession of the petitioner over the land in
question be protected till the decision of the appeal by the Additional Collector.
The order passed by the Additional Collector on 21 st June, 2016 is
without application of mind and without recording any reasons. The impugned order
does not show any reason for not continuing the interim order which was in force for
about 5 months. If the interim protection is not granted to the petitioner and the
appeal filed by the petitioner is allowed, then the petitioner would be put to
irreparable loss and hardships. Hence, to sub-serve the ends of justice the following
order is passed:
(i) The impugned order is set aside.
(ii) It is directed that till the decision of the appeal filed by the petitioner
before the Additional Collector the possession of the petitioner over the land in
question shall not be disturbed.
(iii) The learned Additional Collector shall dispose the appeal filed by the
petitioner within three months.
(iv) The petitioner undertakes to appear before the Additional Collector on 9 th
3 wp3545.16
August, 2016 and abide by further orders in the matter.
(v) The learned Advocate for the petitioner has stated that the amount of fine
of Rs.21,938/- is deposited by the petitioner. If the amount is not deposited, the
petitioner shall deposit the amount till 9 th August, 2016, failing which this order shall
stand recalled and the Authorities will be at liberty to take appropriate action in the
matter.
(vi) Petition is allowed in the above terms.
In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs.
ig
JUDGE
Tambaskar.
4 wp3545.16
CERTIFICATE
" I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a true and correct copy of
original signed Judgment/Order".
Uploaded By : N.V. Tambaskar. Uploaded On : 2.8.2016.
Personal Assistant.
