Disposed

Nanda Rampal Valmiki and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Jul 2010CAI/107/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court stayed the implementation of an eviction order against applicants claiming authorized occupancy, directing the District Collector to examine the claim within four weeks. Eviction proceedings against other unauthorized occupants were allowed to proceed.

What did the court decide?

Stayed implementation of eviction order against applicants pending inquiry; eviction proceedings against other unauthorized occupants allowed.

Nanda Rampal Valmiki and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Landlord and Tenant | Bombay HC (2010)

CAI.107/2010

acd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 107 OF 2010 IN

¶6

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 36 OF 2010

¶7

Smt. Nanda Rampal Valmiki & Ors.

¶8

..Applicants.

¶9

Vs.

¶10

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶11

...Respondents.

¶12

¶13

Mr.Vishwasrao Deokar with Ujwala S.Waychal, for Applicants. Mr. S.V. Sakhare, for the Petitioners. Ms. Jyoti Pawar, Additional GP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Uday Warunjikar, for Respondent No.5.

¶14

CORAM: MOHIT S. SHAH C.J. AND S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

¶15

DATE : 1^st JULY. 2010.

¶16

P.C.

¶17

1] The applicants/Interveners claim to be authorized occupants

¶18

of the land in question and on that basis pray that they be added as partyrespondents. The applicants have further prayed that they are authorised occupants and order of eviction dated 22.4.2010 passed by the Authority may not be implemented till the disposal of the PIL.

¶19

2] Without going into the merits of the controversy between the parties, we direct respondent no.3-the District Collector, Solapur or officer authorised by the District Collector not below the rank of Deputy Collector

¶20

CAI.107/2010

¶21

¶22

to examine the claim of the applicants and also whether the applicants are authorised occupants of the land in question.

¶23

3] As far as the other persons to whom the notices are issued by the Authority with regard to unauthorised occupancy, the concerned Authority shall proceed with the eviction proceedings.

¶24

4] Till the applicants’ claim is examined by the District Collector or his authorised officer, applicants shall not be evicted. This direction is given in view of the assurance given by the learned counsel for the applicants that they will co-operate with the Collector or the authorised officer in completion of the inquiry in the applicants’ claim. Inquiry to be completed within four weeks.

¶25

5] Civil Application stands disposed of.

¶26

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶27

S. C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.

Nanda Rampal Valmiki and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanda Rampal Valmiki and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Behram Boman Irani Vs Manohar Keshav Kadam and Anr.

Behram Boman Irani Vs Manohar Keshav Kadam and Anr.

Kirloskar Pneumatic Co. Ltd. Vs Kirloskar Pneumatic Company Limited

Nanda Rampal Valmiki and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Birudeo Anandrao Lawate and Anr. Vs Alka Anant Desai and Ors.

Shaikh Mohd. Khalid Mukhtar Ahmad and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.