Janrao S/O Dagduji Ingle vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6048 Bom

                                                                         6.wp.1554.2021.odt
                                              (1)

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

                               WRIT PETITION NO.1554/2021

 PETITIONER                Janrao s/o Dagduji Ingle,
                           Aged about 55 Years,
                           Occupation : Business,
                           R/o Danapur, Tq. Telhara,
                           District Akola.
                                                               (ON RA)

                                      // VERSUS //

 RESPONDENTS               1.     The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary
                                  Department of Revenue and Forest,
                                  Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
                                                            (ON RA)

                           2.     The Divisional Commissioner Amravati
                                  Division, Amravati.      (ON RA)

                           3.     The Collector, Akola,
                                  Tq. and District Akola.       (ON RA)

                           4.     Grampanchayat Danapur, through its Secretary
                                  Tq. Telhara District Akola.
                                                              (ON RA)

                           5.     Kashiram s/o Ramchandra Khadsan,
                                  Aged about 50 Years, Occupation: Agriculturist,
                                  R/o Danapur, Tq. Telhara, District Akola.
                                                            (ON RA)

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Shri J. B. Kasat, Advocate for petitioner.
          Shri N. R. Patil, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



                                   CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                                           AVINASH G. GHAROTE, JJ.

                                   DATE   :    05/04/2021



                                                                     6.wp.1554.2021.odt


 ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER:- SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)


 1]                Heard Shri Kasat, learned counsel for petitioner and Shri

Patil, learned AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3, who appears by waiving

notice. There is no need to issue notice to respondent no.4 as main

prayer is made against respondent no.1.

2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent.

3] The contention is that the petitioner has been allotted a

peace of land admeasuring 24 Sq. meter west of plot No.642 by the Sub-

Divisional Officer and lease deed has also been been executed

accordingly in favour of the petitioner. The land in the property card has

also been shown as standing in the name of the petitioner on lease hold

basis. The further contention is that the respondent no.2 is claiming that

the lease of the land in question was allotted wrongly to the petitioner

by the S.D.O. It is submitted that even the veracity of the lease deed has

been questioned by respondent nos. 2 and 3 although no conclusive

finding in that regard has been recorded by any of them. But, now, on

the premise that the lease could not have allotted the lease of land in

question has been cancelled and the petitioner has been sought to be

dispossessed of the land, which he is in possession of on validly created

lease since year 2008.

6.wp.1554.2021.odt

4] Shri Kasat, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner has also filed an appeal under Section 247 of the

Maharashtra Lands Revenue Code, 1966 against the impugned orders

passed respectively by respondent nos.2 and 3 before the Hon'ble

Minister on 18.12.2020. But, it has not been listed for hearing even

once since then. Shri Kasat, further submits that meanwhile, the

petitioner has received a notice from respondent no.4, the Gram Vikas

Adhikari, Gram Panchayat, Danapur threatening that the petitioner's

possession would be forcibly removed. Shri Kasat, learned counsel

therefore, submits that necessary directions be issued to the respondent

no.1 for deciding the appeal expeditiously and some interim protection

till disposal of the appeal be also granted to the petitioner. While first

prayer is not opposed by the learned AGP, the second prayer is resisted

by him. He submits that there are concurrent findings recorded by the

Collector and also the Commissioner in the matter and therefore, now

the petitioner would have no case for seeking any interim relief.

5] We find that the petitioner here is in possession of the land

in question since the year 2008 and that there is also lease deed

executed in his favour. It is further noticed that name of the petitioner

has been shown as the person in possession of the land on lease hold

basis in the property card. Then, the appeal of the petitioner is not

being taken up for hearing in any way. The petitioner states that the

6.wp.1554.2021.odt

petitioner is running a grocery shop on the land in question and if he is

forcibly dispossessed, he would lose his butter and bread. All these

circumstances, in our opinion, make out a good case for grant of interim

relief and also relief in the nature of making disposal of the appeal

pending before respondent no.1 time bound.

6] In the result, the petition is allowed. Respondent no.1 is

directed to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible and preferably

within three months from the date of the order. If necessary, the

respondent no.1 may grant virtual hearing of the appeal.

7] Meanwhile, we also direct that no coercive steps be taken

against the petitioner for dispossessing him till final disposal of the

appeal.

Rule accordingly. No costs.

      (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J)                    (SUNIL B. SHUKRE J.)




 Sarkate.