Petitioner challenged Commissioner's orders declaring additional surplus land after initial declaration and land distribution. Court held that once land is delimited and handed over, Commissioner cannot invoke Section 45(2).
Judgments and orders quashed and set aside; Rule made absolute.
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 wp 1384.92
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 1384 OF 1992
Sudhakar S/o Sakharam Shejul, Age : Major, Occu. : Agril., R/o Kharat Adgaon, Tq. Majalgaon, Dist. Beed. .. Petitioner
Versus
Shri V. D. Salunke, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri V. B. Ghatage, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 10TH JANUARY, 2013.
2 wp 1384.92
ORAL JUDGMENT :
. The petitioner was declared as surplus land holder vide order of the Surplus Land Determination Tribunal dated 30th April, 1976. The Commissioner exercising powers U/Sec. 45(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act directed the S. L. D. T. to declare additional surplus area keeping in view observations made by him. Thereafter, S. L. D. T. vide order dated 26.06.1986 declared the petitioner surplus land holder.
3 wp 1384.92
Vs. Vasantsen Dwarkadas reported in AIR 1956 Bom. 530 , so also the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in a case of Shaliabai Astak Qureshi Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 1986 Mh. L. J. 725 and that of the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 24 of 1986 dated 13th February, 1991, so also the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1854 of 1988 dated 13th April, 2004.
4 wp 1384.92
had passed the initial orders declaring the petitioner surplus, the lands were delimited, the possession of the surplus land was taken from the petitioner and handed over to the landless persons. It is thereafter the Commissioner had exceeded powers U/Sec. 45(2) of the said Act.
Sd/-
[ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
bsb/Jan. 13
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the District Commissioner could exercise powers under Section 45(2) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act after the petitioner was declared a surplus land holder and
Whether the proceedings initiated by the Commissioner after the declaration of surplus land are nonest.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
S. C. Prasher Vs. Vasantsen DwarkadasReferred¶16
S. C. Prasher Vs. Vasantsen Dwarkadas reported in AIR 1956 Bom. 530 · Who else cites this
Shaliabai Astak Qureshi Vs. State of MaharashtraReferred¶16
Shaliabai Astak Qureshi Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 1986 Mh. L. J. 725 · Who else cites this
Writ Petition No. 24 of 1986 dated 13th February, 1991Referred¶16
Writ Petition No. 1854 of 1988 dated 13th April, 2004Referred¶16
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Sudhakar S/o Sakharam Shejul
The State of Maharashtra
The Surplus Land Determination Tribunal, Majalgaon
The Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad
Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, At Aurangabad
S. V. GANGAPURWALA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
