Remanded

Smt Haribai Mahadeo Thaware v. the Union of India and Ors.

Bombay HC3 Dec 2010WP/485/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court held that the respondent no.3's finding that the petitioner's holding exceeds 2 hectares lacked material record support. The petitioner was directed to be heard and the matter reconsidered under the 2008 Agricultural Debt Waiver Scheme within three months.

What did the court decide?

Respondent no.3 directed to reconsider the matter affording petitioner an opportunity of hearing within three months.

Smt Haribai Mahadeo Thaware Vs the Union of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2010)

¶1

(1)

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 485 OF 2010

¶4

Smt. Haribai w/o. Mahadeo Thaware, Age : 44 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Anandgaon, Taluka : Majalgaon, District : Beed. .. Petitioner.

¶5

versus

¶6

The Union of India, Through its Secretary, Financial Services Dept. (Krishi Karja Maphi Yojana-2008), Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Department of Cooperative, Marketing (Panan) and Textile Industry, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032.

¶8

The Zonal (Nodal) Officer, State Bank of Hyderabad, Zonal Office, 1-Town Centre, CIDCO, Aurangabad - 431 003.

¶9

The District Deputy Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Beed, District : Beed.

¶10

(2)

¶11

The Beed District Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Beed, through its Managing Director.

¶12

.. Respondents.

¶13

Mr. V.L. Dhoble, Advocate, for the petitioner.

¶14

Mr. Alok Sharma, Assistant Solicitor General, for respondent no.1.

¶15

Mr. V.H. Dighe, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.2 and 4.

¶16

Mr. Ruturaj Patil, Advocate, for respondent no.3.

¶17

Respondent no.5 served (Absent).

¶18

CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & R.M. BORDE, JJ.

¶19

DATE : 3RD DECEMBER 2010

¶20

COURT'S ORDER (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) :

¶21

The limited grievance of the petitioner is that though she is entitled to the benefit of the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008, framed by the Central Government, as holding of the petitioner is less than 2 hectares, the benefit of

¶22

(3)

¶23

the said scheme is denied to her by the respondent no.3.

¶24

We, prima facie, find that the finding, arrived at, by the respondent no.3, that the holding of the petitioner is above 2 hectares, is not based on the material on record.

¶25

In that view of the matter, we direct the respondent no.3, to re-consider the matter, as per the Agricultural Debt Waiver and Debt Relief Scheme, 2008, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, and decide the same on its own merits, within a period of three months from today.

¶26

With the above directions, the petition is disposed of.

¶27

( R.M. BORDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE

¶28

bgp/wp485

Smt Haribai Mahadeo Thaware v. the Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Haribai Mahadeo Thaware v. the Union of India 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

Ter Large Size Multi Purpose Co. Operative Society Vs Union of India and Ors.

Sandeep Dattarao Lekule Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Maharashtra Rajya Prathmik Ksikshak Samittee Aurangbad Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Ors.

M/S Fertiland Industries,through M.D.Anilkumar Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Sheshrao Bhanudas Kakde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Inderkour Ratansingh Shiledar (Ragi) Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thorugh the Principal Secretary