Bombay High Court
Sitabai @ Kamlabai W/O Sonbaji ... vs The State Of Mah, Thr ... on 4 July, 2017
Bench: I.K. Jain
WP 4182.08.odt 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.4182 OF 2008
1] Sitabai @ Kamlabai w/o Sonbaji Bhende,
Aged about 61 years,
Resident of Waddhamna, Tah. Hingna,
District-Nagpur.
2] Pushpabai w/o Ramswaroopji Sakore,
Aged about 45 years,
Resident of Juna Bagadganj,
Nagpur. .. PETITIONERS
.. VERSUS ..
1] The State of Maharashtra,
Through Tahsildar, Kamptee,
District-Nagpur.
2] The Deputy Collector,
Nagpur.
3] The Sub-Divisional Officer,
Nagpur.
4] The Additional Divisional Commissioner,
Nagpur.
5] Dr. Hukumchand s/o Lodbaji Supare,
Aged about 63 years,
R/o. Shiv Panchayatan Nagar, Kamptee,
District-Nagpur.
6] Gulabchand s/o Lodbaji Supare,
Aged about 65 years,
R/o. Shiv Panchayatan Nagar, Kamptee,
District-Nagpur.
7] Deepchand s/o Lodbaji Supare,
Aged about 51 years,
::: Uploaded on - 10/07/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 12/07/2017 00:03:46 :::
WP 4182.08.odt 2
R/o. Shiv Panchayatan Nagar, Kamptee,
District-Nagpur.
8] Geetabai Kondbaji Khedgarkar,
Aged about 58 years,
R/o. Tilak Road, Mangalwari, Ramtek,
District-Nagpur.
9] Yamunabai d/o Lodbaji Supare,
Aged about 53 years,
C/o. Gulabchand Supare,
R/o. Shiv Panchayatan Nagar,
Kamptee, District-Nagpur.
10] Chandrabhaghabai w/o Gajanan Karemore,
Aged about 48 years,
R/o. Bhande Plot, Umred Road,
Nagpur.
11] Savitri Gajananrao Telrandhe,
Aged about 43 years,
R/o. Telipura, Gram Yerkheda,
Tahsil-Kamptee, Distt. Nagpur.
12] Pramod s/o Atmaramji (Mahalle) Patil,
R/o. Yerkheda, Tahsil-Kamptee,
District-Nagpur. .. RESPONDENTS
..........
None for petitioners,
Shri Bhagwan M. Lonare, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 4.
..........
CORAM : KUM. INDIRA JAIN, J.
DATED : JULY 04, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT
By this petition, petitioners have challenged the
orders dated 28.3.2008 passed by respondent no.4
Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur in Revision
No.14/RTS-64/2004-2005, 23.9.2004 passed by respondent
no.3 Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagpur in Revenue Appeal
No.65/RTS-64/2001-2002 and 18.1.2001 passed by
respondent no.2 - Deputy Collector, Nagpur in Revenue
Appeal No.7/RTS-64/1997-1998 confirming the order dated
29.2.1998 passed by respondent no.1-Tahsildar, Kamptee
effecting the mutation entries in favour of respondent no.5.
2] The challenge is basically on the ground that an
opportunity of hearing was not granted to petitioners and
there was violation of principles of natural justice.
3] With the assistance of learned AGP representing
respondent nos.1 to 4, this court has gone through the
orders impugned in this petition.
4] From the mutation extract dated 6.2.1988, it
appears that petitioners and respondents have signed the
order of mutation. The revenue record reveals that
petitioners were aware of order of mutation passed by
respondent no.1.
5] In affidavit-in-reply filed by respondent no.1, it is
specifically mentioned that notices were duly served on
petitioners and other concerning parties before effecting
mutation entry. Petitioners filed additional affidavit of
petitioner no.1 and denied that notices were issued to them
on 6.2.1988.
6] The learned AGP has produced original register
and it is apparent from entries 118 and 119 at page nos.1
and 2 of mutation register for the year 1988-89 that
petitioners have received notices and signed order of
effecting mutation entry in favour of respondent no.5.
7] In view of the above, grievance of petitioners that
without giving an opportunity of hearing to them order came
to be passed is against the record and without substance.
No illegality or perversity is noticed in impugned orders. No
interference is thus warranted in writ jurisdiction.
8] Writ Petition No.4182/2008 stands dismissed. Rule
is discharged. No costs.
(Kum. Indira Jain, J.)
Gulande, PA
