Disposed

Ramesh Dhanaji Patil v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Land Revenue Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Aug 2013WP/3910/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging the jurisdiction of the SubDivisional Officer regarding an unheard land revenue appeal. Court directed filing of additional memo and expeditious hearing by Additional Collector.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner directed to file additional appeal memo within four weeks; Additional Collector directed to decide appeal within six months after receipt of papers.

Ramesh Dhanaji Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra, through… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2013)

wp3910.13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.3910 OF 2013

¶7

Ramesh Dhanaji Patil ....Petitioner V/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors. ....Respondents

¶8

Mr.P.S.Dani i/by R.A.Karale for the petitioner.

¶9

Mr.V.S.Gokhale AGP for the respondent/State.

¶10

CORAM : V.M.KANADE & K.R.SHRIRAM,JJ DATE : 6th August, 2013.

¶11

P.C. :-

¶12

1 The only grievance of the petitioner is that the SubDivisional Officer, Thane who was pleased to reject the appeal filed by the petitioner, did not have the jurisdiction to hear the appeal since he has delegated the powers of hearing the appeal to the Additional Collector Thane.

¶13

2 The brief facts are that the petitioner has filed an appeal before the SDO Thane under sections 247 & 155 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and also under Section 4(1) of the

¶14

2 wp3910.13

¶15

Maharashtra Revenue Patel (abolition office) Act 1962. The petitioner thereafter preferred an appeal before the Sub Divisional Additional Collector Thane. However, the said appeal has not been heard so far. We have asked the learned AGP to file the affidavit. Learned AGP upon instructions, submits that despite best efforts having been taken by the Additional Collector, he could not trace the appeal filed by the petitioner herein. It is submitted that the petitioner shall re-construct the appeal or alternatively file a fresh appeal within a period of four weeks from today. It is submitted that the Additional Collector is directed to hear the appeal on merits expeditiously.

¶16

3 The petition can be conveniently disposed of by directing the petitioner to file additional appeal memo along with the impugned orders within four weeks from today and upon such appeal memo and papers being filed, the Additional Collector shall decide the said appeal after issuing notice to the respondents expeditiously within six months. Petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

(K.R.SHRIRAM,J)

¶18

(V.M.KANADE,J)

Ramesh Dhanaji Patil v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Land Revenue Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Dhanaji Patil v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Land Revenue Dept 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

Shri. Subhash Dhondiram Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Co-Operation, Mark. and Textile Dept and Anr.

Surendra Bhikaji Shinde and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Saroj Sashikant Talathi Vs Director of Town Planning, Maharashtra State and Ors.

The Maharashtra State Co-Op. Bank Ltd, through Joint Manager Vs Gangapur Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd, through Chairman Kailash B. Patil and Ors.

Ramesh Vasudeo Khare Vs the Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation, Kalyan and Ors.

Chhaya Shirish Mohite Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Social Justice and Special Assistance Dept and Ors.