Sakharam Mahadev Jadhav Since ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 10774 Bom

                                                                                   3. civil wp 2661-21.doc


R.M. AMBERKAR
(Private Secretary)
                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                                WRIT PETITION NO. 2661 OF 2021

             Sakharam Mahadev Jadhav
             Since deceased through his legal heir
             Kailash Sakharam Jadhav                                        .. Petitioner
                       Versus
             State of Maharashtra & Ors.                                    .. Respondents

                                          ...................
              Mr. Tanaji Mhatugade for the Petitioner
              Mr. A.I. Patel, Addl. G.P. a/w Mr. P.G. Sawant, AGP for the State
              Mr. Dinesh P. Adsule for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5
              Mr. Deepak Pujari, Chief Officer present.
                                                     ...................

                                       CORAM : S.J. KATHAWALLA &
                                                   MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : AUGUST 10, 2021.

P.C.:

1. Perused the order dated 06.08.2021, paragraph 6 of which is

relevant and reproduced hereunder :

"6. On 13.07.2021 this Court passed the following Order in the above Writ Petition :

"The Learned AGP appearing for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 seeks time to take instructions in the matter. Despite notice, none appear for Respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6. Respondent Nos. 4 to 6 are directed to remain present before this Court through video-conferencing alongwith their respective Affidavits-in-Reply. Stand over to 30th July, 2021.

However, Respondent Nos.1 to 3 have not filed any Affidavit till date. Instead, they through the AGP, once again seek time to enable them to file an Affidavit. The matter pertains to the Subject Property owned by the Petitioner, which is kept

1 of 3

3. civil wp 2661-21.doc

reserved by the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 since the last 20 years. Prima facie, no steps are taken to acquire the same. The original owner has passed away without using his subject property in the manner desired by him. The Architect of the heirs of the Original owner submitted the proposed building plans and sought approval to execute the development work on 15th November, 2019 which came to be rejected. The Writ Petition filed by the heirs of the original owner seeking the above reliefs cannot be proceeded with since adjournments are sought from time to time on the ground that an Affidavit in Reply will be filed. It is for this reason that the common man, often, and sometimes correctly gets an impression that except for granting dates / adjournments in matters (Tarikh- pe-Taikh), even qua long standing grievances / disputes, there is no meaningful outcome or redressal of their grievance. This impression needs to be dispelled at the earliest. We therefore, by our present Order, put the Authorities to notice that if our orders are not complied with by them in future and Affidavits in Reply are not filed in the time allotted, unless there exists a valid ground explaining their inability to do so, we will be constrained to take stern action against them, including issuing contempt proceedings against the concerned officers for not complying with our orders."

2. Despite what is stated herein above, today an affidavit is filed by

the Joint Director of Town Planning, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai

wherein he has stated that prior to the expiry of the one year period from the

date of service of the purchase notice, Respondent No. 4 - Kulgaon Badlapur

Municipal Council has made an application to Respondent No. 3 - Collector

2 of 3

3. civil wp 2661-21.doc

for acquisition of the said land and therefore, the contention of the Petitioner

qua the lapsing of reservation needs to be rejected.

3. When we questioned the learned AGP whether an application

filed by the Municipal Council with the Collector seeking initiation of

acquisition proceedings of the reserved land, more particularly in view of the

judgments of this Court including the orders passed by this Court in case of

Shobha Mahavir Marle & Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [Civil Writ

Petition (st) No. 1638 of 2020 and in case of Namdeorao Shankarrao Patil &

Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr. [ Civil Writ Petition No. 10002 of

2019], amounts to commencement of a step towards acquisition, the learned

AGP states that we should also read the dates and events which he has

tendered in the Court. When we inquired from the learned AGP as to why

the facts / events mentioned in the chronology are not found in the affidavit,

he had no answer.

4. The aforesaid conduct on the part of the State is strongly

deprecated more so in view of paragraph 6 of the order reproduced herein

above which is in the nature of passing strictures with regard to the delay on

the part of the State in filing its affidavits before the Court.

5. In view of the above, the learned Advocate General shall remain

present before this Court on 11th August, 2021 and assist the Court in the

above matter.

[ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] [ S. J. KATHAWALLA, J. ]

3 of 3