Disposed

Ashok Bhagwanrao Pawar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Aug 2012WP/4577/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner complained name was not recorded in new revenue forms despite possession. High Court directed respondent Nos. 5 to 8 to appear before Tahsildar for spot inquiry within 2 months, noting rights are subject to pending civil suit.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Nos. 5 to 8 directed to appear before Tahsildar on 1st October 2012; Tahsildar directed to hear parties and decide within 2 months.

Ashok Bhagwanrao Pawar Vs the State of Mah and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 4577 OF 2011 "Ashok Bhagwanrao Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others."

¶4

Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram or directions and Registrar's orders. appearances, Court's Orders

¶5

¶6

Mr. N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. V.B. Ghatge, AGP for respondent State/Authorities Mr. N.B. Narwade, Advocate for respondent Nos. 6 to 8.

¶7

CORAM :- B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATE :- 10TH AUGUST, 2012.

¶8

PER COURT :-

¶9

1] It is not in dispute that as per Circular dated 24^th November, 1997, new forms for recording revenue entries are to be used. Grievance of the petitioner is, petitioner is in possession since the time of his forefathers and that entry of cultivation and possession has not been sought to be deleted by anybody. However, merely because of a direction as contained in Column Nos. 6 and 7 of said circular, name of the petitioner is not being continued in new forms as person in cultivation.

¶10

2] Learned AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 submits that there is dispute between the petitioner on one hand and other respondents on the other hand and dispute is pending in civil court Hence, unless and until enquiry is made by visiting the spot, the name or entry of person in possession cannot be entered.

¶11

3] It is not in dispute before this court that respondent Nos. 5 to 8 have not moved revenue authorities for deleting the

¶12

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶14

WRIT PETITION NO. 4577 OF 2011 "Ashok Bhagwanrao Pawar Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others."

¶15

Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram or directions and Registrar's orders. appearances, Court's Orders

¶16

¶17

name of the petitioner. The petitioner has filed a civil suit and in it, said respondents are restrained from alienating the suit property.

¶18

4] In this situation, respondent No.4 has to find out why the entry of petitioner as person in possession in old records cannot be carried forward in new records. Respective counsel are seeking further time to assist the court. However, we direct respondent Nos. 5 to 8 to appear before respondent No.4 Tahsildar on 1^st October, 2012, and to abide by his further instructions in the matter. Tahsildar, Georai shall hear, petitioner, respondents, peruse revenue records and take appropriate decision on the issue within further period of 2 months.

¶19

5] Needless to mention that rights of the parties are already subjected to civil litigation and same shall not be affected or prejudiced by such order of Tahsildar.

¶20

6] With these directions, we dispose of the petition. No costs.

¶21

[SUNIL P. DESHMUKH,J.] [B.P. DHARMADHIKARI,J]

¶22

grt/-

Ashok Bhagwanrao Pawar v. the State of Mah and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashok Bhagwanrao Pawar v. the State of Mah 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

Pramod Shriram Salunke Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Shridatta Plastic Industries Thr Proprietor Vs the State of Maharashtra Andors

Laxman Sahebrao Jadhav and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kai Pundalikrao Tathe Bahuuddeshiya Sevabhavi Sanstha Aurangabad through President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Swami Vivekanant Shikshan Prasrak Mandal Pathri Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Dr Zakir Hussain Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Nanded Vs the State of Mah and Ors.