Disposed

Aashish Madanlal Rathi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Dec 2014WP/3616/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court directed authorities to dispose of a pending application for previous sanction under Section 36A of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code within specified timelines, noting that State Government approval is required before sanction can be granted.

What did the court decide?

Direct additional collector, divisional commissioner and state government to process application and grant prior sanction within specified time limits.

Aashish Madanlal Rathi and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2014)

1/3

WP3616-4.12

PNP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.3616 OF 2014

¶7

Ashish Madanlal Rathi and others

¶8

...Petitioners.

¶9

versus

¶10

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶11

..Respondents.

¶12

Mr. Suresh M. Sabrad for the Petitioners.

¶13

Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 to 8.

CORAM : A.S. OKA &

A.S. GADKARI, JJ.

4^th December, 2014.

P.C. :

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and the learned AGP for the Respondents.

¶19

According to the case of the Petitioners, an application has been made by them to the Additional Collector, Nashik for grant of previous sanction under sub-section (1) of Section 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short “the said Code”). It is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners that even as of today, the application is pending before the Additional Collector. The learned AGP has no instructions on this aspect.

¶20

As permission is sought for transfer of holding of a tribal to a non-

2/3

WP3616-4.12

PNP

tribal by way of sale, the Collector cannot grant previous sanction without previous approval of the State Government. The procedure which is normally followed in such cases is that a proposal is forwarded by the Collector to the office of the Divisional Commissioner along with his recommendations and after considering the proposal, the same is forwarded by the office of the Divisional Commissioner to the State Government along with his recommendations to enable the State to take appropriate decision as regards grant of previous approval as contemplated by sub-section (1) of Section 36A. Such applications cannot be kept pending on the ground that there is a proposal to amend the statute.

¶25

As the application made by the Petitioner is pending for a considerably long time, we dispose of the Petition by passing the following order :

¶26

i) We direct the Petitioners or their representative to appear before the Additional Collector, District Nashik on 24^th December, 2014 at 11.00 a.m. They shall produce an authenticated copy of this order before the Additional Collector, Nashik;

¶27

ii) Within a period of two months from 24^th December, 2014, the Additional Collector, Nashik after scrutinizing the proposal shall submit a report and/or recommendation on the said application to the office of the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik;

¶28

iii) The Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik within a period of two months from the date on which proposal / recommendation

3/3

WP3616-4.12

PNP

is received from the Additional Collector, shall forward the same to the State Government along with appropriate recommendation on the issue of grant of previous sanction;

¶33

iv) On receipt of the proposal, the State Government shall take appropriate decision within a period of three months from the date on which the proposal is received. The order passed by the State Government shall be immediately communicated to the Additional Collector, Nashik;

¶34

v) On receipt of the said order, the Additional Collector shall pass appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of one month from the date on which the order is received;

¶35

vi) It is made clear that no adjudication on the question whether the Petitioners are entitled to previous sanction as sought by them has been made and all issues shall be decided by the appropriate authorities;

¶36

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

¶37

(A.S. Oka, J.)

¶38

(A.S. Gadkari, J.)

Aashish Madanlal Rathi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aashish Madanlal Rathi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept 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

Kiran Piraji Nangare Vs Paras Bhomraj Oswal and Ors.

Mrs. Jaymala Shahajirao Kharade and Ors. Vs Collector, Miraj and Ors.

Shri. Madhukar Vitthal Jakkal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Shamrao Dharma Vantamuri and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Suresh Ganpati Dhonukshe Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.

Uday Gajanan Warde and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra through Chief Secretary, Urban Development Dept. and Ors.