The High Court of Bombay held that the respondents must decide on the regularisation of the petitioners' possession over government gairan land in accordance with applicable policy and Supreme Court directions.
Directions issued to Respondent No. 2 to decide on regularisation of possession within eight months after hearing.
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.
wp347514.odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.3475 OF 2014
1 Parubai w/o Kishan Mule, age: major, Occ: Household, R/o at Post Lonala, Tq.Georai, District Beed. 2 Arjun s/o Laxian Chavan, age: 65 years, Occ: Agri., R/o as above. 3 Subhash s/o Murlidhar Waghmare, age: 27 years, Occ: as above, R/o as above. Petitioners Versus 1 The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Revenue & Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2 The Collector, Beed. 3 The Sub Divisional Officer, at Beed, District Beed. 4 The Tahsildar, Tahsil Office, Georai, District Beed. Respondents
Mrs.Sharada P. Chate, advocate for petitioners. Mr.S.K.Kadam, A.G.P. for Respondents.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
V.L.ACHLIYA, JJ. DATE :10th June, 2014 ORDER (Per R.M.Borde, J.):
1 The petitioners are praying for regularisation of their
wp347514.odt
{2}
possession over the property in dispute.
2 According to the petitioners, they are in possession of Government gairan land S.No.58 admeasuring 80 ares, situate at village Lonala, Tq.Georai, District Beed, from 1975-1976 onwards. They claim that as per the policy prescribed by the Government on 28.11.1991 as well as in view of the Government Resolution dated 12.07.2011, their occupation over the property needs to be regularized.
3 A reference can be made in this context to the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Jagpal Singh & others Vs State of Punjab & others , reported in (2011) 11 SCC 396, wherein the Supreme Court has observed in paragraph no.22 of the judgment, as quoted below:
“Before parting with this case, we give directions to all the State Governments in the country that they should prepare schemes for eviction of illegal/unauthorised occupants of Gram Sabha / Gram Panchayat / Paramboke / Shamlat land and these must be restored to the Gram Sabha / Gram Panchayat for the common use of villagers of the village. For this purpose, the Chief Secretaries of all State Governments / Union Territories in India are directed to do the needful, taking the help of other senior officers of the Governments. The said scheme should provide for the speedy eviction of such illegal occupant, after giving him a show cause notice and a brief hearing. Long duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularising the illegal
wp347514.odt
{3}
possession. Regularisation should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some Government notification to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes / Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary or other public utility on the land.”
4 The Government has also formulated a policy in observance of decision of the Supreme Court dated 12.07.2011 and has issued fresh guidelines in respect of regularisation of encroachment over the Government gairan land.
5 In this view of the matter, this petition can be disposed of by issuing directions to to the Respondents, more particularly Respondent No.2, to take decision in respect of regularisation of possession / encroachment of the petitioners over the Government gairan land in accordance with the policy framed by the Government as well as mandate of the Supreme Court in the matter of Jagpal Singh & others (supra). The Collector, after extending an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, shall take appropriate decision in the matter, as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of eight months from today.
6 With the directions as aforesaid, writ petition stands disposed of.
V.L.ACHLIYA R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE
R.M.BORDE
adb/wp347514
1 issue framed by the court
Whether directions should be issued to the respondents to decide on the regularisation of the petitioners' possession over government gairan land.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jagpal Singh & others Vs State of Punjab & othersExplained¶14
(2011) 11 SCC 396 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
1 Parubai w/o Kishan Mule, Arjun s/o Laxian Chavan, 3 Subhash s/o Murlidhar Waghmare
The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Revenue & Forest Department
R.M. Borde
V.L. Achliya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
