Santosh Ganpatrao Nikam And ... vs The Sub Divisional Officer, ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 4065 Bom

wp.5443.14.jud                    1


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

                     WRIT PETITION NO.5443 OF 2014


01]    Santosh s/o Ganpatrao Nikam,
       Aged about 48 years.

02]    Champat s/o Ganpatrao Kathane,
       Aged about 48 years.

       Both Agriculturist, R/o Davargaon,
       Tah. Warud, District Amravati.                         .... Petitioners

       -- Versus -

01]    The Sub-Divisional Officer,
       Morshi, District Amravati.

02]    The Tahsildar, Warud,
       District Amravati.

03]    Rajendra s/o Gulabrao Gadge,
       R/o Devrgaon, Tah. Warud,
       District Amravati.

04]    Kailash Gulabrao Gadge [dead],
       Through his L.Rs.

       4(a) Annapurna wd/o Kailash Gadge,
            R/o Dawargaon, Tq. Warud,
            District Amravati.

       4(b) Karan s/o Kailash Gadge,
            Dawargaon, Tq. Warud,
            District Amravati.

       4(c) Sagar s/o Kailash Gadge,
            R/o Dawargaon, Tq. Warud,
            District Amravati.




 ::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017               ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 00:54:35 :::
 wp.5443.14.jud                           2


       4(d) Shital d/o Kailash Gadge,
            Dawargaon, Tq. Warud,
            District Amravati.

05]    Manohar s/o Ganpatrao Bele [dead],
       Through L.Rs.

       5-A      Suresh s/o Manohar Bele.

       5-B      Ramesh s/o Manohar Bele.

       5-C      Ganesh s/o Manoharrao Bele,
                C/o Bhagwantrao Gomkale,
                R/o Rohan, Post Walani,
                Tah. Saoner, District Nagpur.

       5-D Rajendra s/o Manohar Bele.

                Respondents 5-A, 5-B and 5-D are
                r/o Amdapur, Tah. Warud,
                District Amravati.                               .... Respondents


Shri N.R. Saboo, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Shri A.M. Balpande, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Shri Sudhir Malode, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 to 5.

                CORAM           : KUM. INDIRA JAIN, J.
                DATE            : JULY 5, 2017.



ORAL JUDGMENT :-


                Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.




 ::: Uploaded on - 07/07/2017                     ::: Downloaded on - 08/07/2017 00:54:35 :::
 wp.5443.14.jud                         3


02]             Challenge in petition is to the order dated 26/05/2014

passed by respondent no.1-Sub Divisional Officer, Morshi thereby

modifying the order passed by Mamlatdar dated 2/04/2008.


03]             Learned Counsel for the parties submit that Sub

Divisional Officer has granted 4.6 feet way from Shiv Dhura and

from the reasons recorded in the order, it is not clear on what

basis the Sub-Divisional Officer has determined the way to the

extent of 4.6 feet.             Further submission is that unless it is

determined whether it is Shiv or Shiv Dhura, the order passed by

Sub-Divisional Officer carries no meaning.


04]             In this situation, learned Counsel for the parties

submit that matter be remanded to Sub-Divisional Officer, Morshi

for deciding the revision afresh.


05]             In view of above, writ petition is partly allowed in the

following terms :


                                   ORDER

i. The order passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Morshi on

26/05/2014 is quashed and set aside.

ii. In view of the observations made above, respondent

no.1 is directed to decide the revision afresh within a

period of three months from the date of appearance

of the parties

iii. Parties to appear before the Sub-Divisional Officer,

Morshi on 24th July, 2017.

iv. Rule accordingly with no order as to costs.

*sdw                                         (KUM. INDIRA JAIN, J.)