The court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Government resolution denying allotment of land to an ex-serviceman. The court upheld the reservation policy granting priority to recipients of specific medals and war participants.
The writ petition was dismissed; no objection could be taken to the decision of the State Government.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.954 OF 2007
Gangaram Laxman Rasal.
...Petitioner.
vs.
State of Maharashtra....Respondent.
Mr.Uday Warunjikar, for Petitioner.
Mr.A.H.Palekar, AGP for Respondent-State.
CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH &
V.M.KANADE, JJ.
DATED: 20th NOVEMBER,2007.
P.C .:-
1.The petitioner is Ex-servicemen. He
applied for allotment of land as a person retired
from army. His application has been rejected by
communication dated 2.5.2002 relying on the
Government resolution dated 15.5.1999. By this
2
petition, the petitioner challenges the validity
of that Government resolution. We have perused
the Government resolution. It appears that the
policy decision of the State Government initially
was to grant priority in allotment of land to
those persons who had participated in 1971 Indo-
Pak war and 1962 Indo-Pak war and Operation
Pawan. A grievance was made by the persons not
involved in those wars but who had received Param
Vishishta Seva Padak, Ati Vishishta Seva padak
or Vishishta Seva padak. The Government by
Resolution dated 15.5.1999 decided to grant
priority to such persons also. The petitioner
admittedly is not holding any such medal and
therefore, allotment is denied to him. The
learned Counsel submits the Government Resolution
of 1999 is discriminatory. In our opinion, the
challenge is not well founded because the policy
decision of the Government is to give priority to
only a particular category of persons. The
distinction is made between the personnel who
participated in certain wars and the personnel
who did not participate in those Wars and
3
personnel who were recipients of certain named
medals and personnel who did not receive those
medals. The matter is essentially in the realm
of policy decision and we do not find any
arbitrary discrimination made.
2.It appears that the petitioner initially
filed a civil suit, it is only after dismissal of
the civil suit that he has filed the writ
petition. As the petitioner does not comply with
the criteria laid down by the State Government
for entitling him to priority in grant of
government land, no exception can be taken to the
decision of the State Government. The petition
is, therefore, disposed of.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Government resolution denying land allotment to ex-servicemen without specific medals constitutes arbitrary discrimination.
Whether the State Government's policy granting priority to recipients of specific war medals and defense awards is valid.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Gangaram Laxman Rasal
State of Maharashtra
D.K. Deshmukh
V.M. Kanade
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court