Disposed

Shiri. Shivaji Govind Badekar and Ors. v. Village Panchayat of Village Kavathe and Ors.

Bombay HC24 Sept 2014WP/3208/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of a writ petition concerning the Village Panchayat's inability to remove encroachments due to lack of infrastructure, setting out directions for future applications to Tahsildars and police for infrastructure and protection while leaving substantive contentions open.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed on terms allowing Village Panchayat to apply to Tahsildar and police for assistance to take action under sections 52 and 53 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act, 1958.

Shiri. Shivaji Govind Badekar and Ors. Vs… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Bombay HC (2014)

wp3208

ssp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.3208 OF 2013

¶5

Shivaji Govind Badekar & Ors. ...Petitioners
vs.

¶6

Village Panchayat of Kavathe & Ors. ...Respondents

¶7

Mr.Pralhad Paranjape for the petitioners
Mr.Uday Warunjikar a/w Mr.Bhushan Deshmukh for the
respondent No.1

¶8

Mr.V.S.Gokhale, AGP for respondent Nos.2 and 3
Mr.A.R.Kapadnis i/b Mr.Vinod Jadhav for respondent
No.4

¶9

CORAM : A.S.OKA, &
 G.S.KULKARNI, JJ.
 DATE : SEPTEMBER 24,2014

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners,
learned counsel for the first respondent, learned
counsel for the fourth respondent and the learned
AGP for second and third respondents. Today, an
affidavit of Shri Laxman R. Padalkar, Gramsevak of
the first respondentVillage Panchayat is tendered
on record. The learned counsel for the first
respondent states that Shri Padalkar, Gramsevak is
personally present in the Court. The said affidavit
records that notices have been issued to the persons
carrying on illegal constructions. Reliance is
placed on resolution dated 23rd November 2012 passed
by the Village Panchayat. It is stated that for
taking action by invoking powers under sections 52
and 53 of the Bombay Panchayat Act,1958, the Village

¶12

2 wp3208

¶13

Panchayat does not have infrastructure as the annual
budget of the Village Panchayat is only of 1.5 lakh
excluding taxes. The submission of the learned
counsel for the fourth respondent is that the fourth
respondent has neither encroached upon the road nor
has carried out any illegal construction.

¶14

2The affidavit tendered today discloses that on
9th March 2010, a resolution has already been passed
by the Village Panchayat for taking action of
removal of encroachment, but it could not be
implemented due to lack of infrastructure.

¶15

3We accept the statements made in the affidavit
of Shri Padalkar,Gramsevak tendered today. In view
of the said affidavit, only substantive prayer which
is prayer clause (b) need not be granted at this
stage.

¶16

4We accordingly, dispose of the petition by
passing the following order:

¶17

(I)We make it clear that it will be open for
the fourth respondent to challenge the actions
of the first respondent in accordance with law;

¶18

(II)As and when the Village Panchayat wants to
take action in accordance with sections 52 and
53 of the Bombay Village Panchayat Act,1958, it
will be open for the Village Panchayat to make
an application to the Tahsildar of Taluka
Khandala as well as to the local police station
having jurisdiction over the village in

¶19

wp3208

¶20

¶21

question;

¶22

(III) If such application is made, the Tahsildar shall make additional manpower available to the Village Panchayat for the purposes of taking statutory action;

¶23

(IV) The Officer In Charge of the local police station shall provide police protection on the basis of the such application made by the Village Panchayat;

¶24

(V) We make it clear that all the contentions raised by the fourth respondent as well as the petitioners are kept open;

¶25

(VI) Writ Petition is disposed of on above terms;

¶26

(VII) All concerned to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.

¶27

(G.S.KULKARNI,J.)

Shiri. Shivaji Govind Badekar and Ors. v. Village Panchayat of Village Kavathe and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiri. Shivaji Govind Badekar and Ors. v. Village Panchayat of Village Kavathe and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Gangaram Sakre and Anr. Vs Pachal Panchakroshi, Shikshan Prasark Mandal and Ors.

Vinayak Hari Kulkarni Vs Nagrik Chetana Manch through Secretary

Smt. Rajashree Rajan Dalvi and Ors. Vs Municipal Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation and Ors.

Shri. Ashok Annarao Lambture Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Arvind Pandurang Dhindale Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Housing Dept and Ors.

Hemant Ramakant Karnik Vs Smita Hemant Karnik