Anilkumar S/O Topandas Dhameja vs The Collector, Collector Office, ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8474 Bom

WP 5217-2022                                    1                       Judgment

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                      NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 5217 OF 2022
Anilkumar S/o Topandas Dhameja,
Aged 50 years, Occ. Business,
R/o Gurudeo Chowk, Sindewahi,
Tq. Sindewahi, District Chandrapur - 441222.
                                                                    PETITIONER
                                  .....VERSUS.....
1.     The Collector,
       Collector Office, Chandrapur,
       Tq. & District Chandrapur.

2.     The Tehsildar, Sindewahi,
       Tq. Sindewahi, District Chandrapur.
                                                                 RESPONDENTS

      Shri P.R. Agrawal with Shri A.S. Ambatkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
     Ms. S.S. Jachak, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents/ State.



CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND URMILA JOSHI - PHALKE, JJ.

DATE : 26/8/2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

counsel for the parties.

2. The learned Assistant Government Pleader waives notice for

the respondents.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 22/8/2022

passed by the Tahsildar in exercise of powers under Section 50(2) of the WP 5217-2022 2 Judgment

Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short "the Code"). By that

order, the petitioner has been directed to remove the encroachment

standing on 0.03 R land of property No. 293 situated at Mouza -

Lonwahi, Tq. Sindewahi, Dist. Chandrapur.

4. It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that

the impugned order was received by the petitioner in the evening hours

on 24/8/2022. It is apprehended that since this period of three days as

per that order has expired, the action stated therein would be

immediately taken and he therefore prays that the correctness of the

impugned order be examined.

5. We find that under the provisions of Section 50(5) of the

Code, remedy by way of an Appeal and Revision is available to a party

aggrieved by an order passed under Section 50(2) of the Code. We are

therefore inclined to religate the petitioner to avail such statutory remedy.

We however see that in the impugned order, time of three days has been

granted to remove the encroachment as alleged. In that view of the

matter, the following order is passed :

i. The petitioner is at liberty to challenge the order dated

22/8/2022 passed under Section 50(2) of the Code by availing the WP 5217-2022 3 Judgment

statutory remedy therein. The time to remove the encroachment as

mentioned in the impugned order is extended for a further period of ten

days from today. If the petitioner avails the statutory remedy, the

proceedings shall be decided on their own merits and in accordance with

law.

ii. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

(URMILA JOSHI - PHALKE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

SUMIT

Digitally signed bySUMIT CHETAN AGRAWAL Signing Date:26.08.2022 19:23