Disposed

Rambhau Huwappa Sonkamble and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC21 Dec 2010CAI/211/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of an application seeking a stay on an eviction order. Directing that the Deputy Collector must consider the applicants' application regarding their land claim within four weeks and decide it within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

The application was disposed of with directions to the Deputy Collector to consider the applicants' claim and decide it within six weeks.

Rambhau Huwappa Sonkamble and Ors. Vs… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Bombay HC (2010)

ASN

CA-211.sxw

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CIVIL APPLICATION N0.211 OF 2010 IN

¶6

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.36 OF 2010

¶7

Shri.Rambhau H. Sonkamble and ors. Vs.

¶8

State of Maharashtra and ors.

¶9

..Applicants.

¶10

..Respondents.

¶11

Mr.V.S.Deokar wiuth Ms. Ujwala Waychal for the Applicants. Mr.P.M.Pradhan i/by S.akhare for the original petitioner. Mrs.J.J.Pawar, Addl. Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. Mr. Rahul Mane i/by Uday Warunjikar for Respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶12

CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. & S.J. KATHAWALLA, J. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2010.

¶13

PC :

¶14

This is an application in which the applicants have prayed that the order dated 22^nd April,2010 in PIL No.36 of 2010 may not be implemented.

¶15

2 By the said order, this Court had directed the respondents authorities to do the needful for eviction of the unauthorized occupants from the land in question, in accordance with law. The land in question is shown as belonging to New Mahatma Phule Magasvargiya Zopadpatti Sahakari Grahnirman Sanstha, Solapur.

¶16

ASN 2

¶17

CA-211.sxw

¶18

3 According to the applicants they are residing on the land in question for the last more than 20 years and the applicants seek to rely on the notices issued by Mahatma Phule Zopadpatti Sahakari Sanstha in the year 1990 or thereabout. According to the applicants they were not granted an opportunity of being heard and therefore, they could not produce the documents before the Deputy Collector, Solapur.

¶19

4 The learned Additional Government Pleader has opposed the application and submitted that the applicants have no right to occupy the land in question as they are not the members of the housing society to which the land has been allotted.

¶20

5 Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we dispose of the application with directions that if the applicants make any application to the Deputy Collector along with the copies of the documents in support of their claim, the Deputy Collector shall consider the same in accordance with law within four weeks from today and the Deputy Collector will decide the application within six weeks from the date of filing of the application.

¶21

5 Civil Application is accordingly, disposed of.

¶22

CHIEF JUSTICE

¶23

S. J. KATHAWALLA , J.

Rambhau Huwappa Sonkamble and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambhau Huwappa Sonkamble 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Shiva Cable Vision Vs the State of Maharashtra

Dwarkadas Alias Dwarkesh Gangadas Pancmatias Vs Lakhani Industries Ltd. 6 Ors.

Rizvi Estaste Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sushila Puran Nath Barry and 4 Ors.

Jayram Shankar Jagdhane and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Madhukar Tulshiram Pawar Vs Mumbai Municipal Corporation and 2 Ors.

Hasumati R. Shah Vs Devleela Developers and 2 Ors.