Disposed

Saifan Khajabhai Mujawar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC20 Aug 2014WP/7438/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of two writ petitions pending before it, directing petitioners to appear before a pending Sub-divisional Officer appeal regarding orders under Section 48 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, ensuring expedient adjudication on their stay applications.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners directed to appear before Appellate Authority on 1st September 2014; stay application to be decided within six weeks.

Saifan Khajabhai Mujawar Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

Rng 1

¶2

wp7438.7439.14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION 7438 OF 2014

¶4

Saifan Khajabhai Mujawar

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

¶7

State of Maharashtra & ors

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

with WRIT PETITION NO.7439 OF 2014

¶10

Sunil Malleshapa Gore .. Petitioner

¶11

¶12

State of Maharashtra & ors .. Respondents

¶13

Ms.Prajakta Gholap i/b Mr.Bhushan Walimbe for Petitioner Mr.S.N.Patil AGP for Respondent nos.1 to 4 in both Petitions

¶14

CORAM: A.S.OKA & G.S.KULKARNI,JJ DATE: 20th August,2014

¶15

P.C.

¶16

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGP for respondents. It is pointed out that substantive Appeals preferred by the petitioners for challenging the orders passed under subsection 7 of section 48 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966 are pending before the SubDivisional Officer. The learned AGP has no instructions

¶17

regarding the stage of the pending appeals.

¶18

Considering the fact that according to the case of the Petitioners, the

¶19

wp7438.7439.14

¶20

Rng 2

¶21

Appeals are pending, the Petitions need not be kept pending and same are disposed of by passing the following order:

¶22

(i) We direct the Petitioners to appear before the Appellate Authority on 1 st September, 2014 at 11 a.m . The petitioners shall produce an authenticated copy of this order before the Appellate Authority;

¶23

(ii) The Appellate Authority shall decide the application for stay filed by the petitioners in the pending Appeal as expeditiously as possible and in any event, within a period of six weeks from 1^st September, 2014. Till the disposal of the Application for stay, ad interim relief granted on 7^th August, 2014 shall continue to operate;

¶24

(iii) We make it clear that the Application for stay shall be decided by the Appellate authority on its own merits without being influenced by the grant of limited ad interim relief by this Court. It will be open for the Appellate Authority to impose appropriate conditions if any, for the grant of stay, if the Appellate authority is inclined to grant stay;

¶25

(iv) The order passed on the said Stay Application shall be communicated to the petitioners and if the said order is adverse to them the adinterim relief granted by this Court shall continue to operate for a period of three weeks from the date of communication of the said orders to the petitioners.

¶26

(v) All contentions on merits in the pending Appeals are expressly kept open.

¶27

(vi) Petitions are disposed of accordingly.

¶28

(vii) Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

(G.S.Kulkarni, J)

(A.S.Oka, J)

Rng 3 wp7438.7439.14

Rng 4 wp7438.7439.14

Saifan Khajabhai Mujawar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saifan Khajabhai Mujawar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri. Pralhad Gundhar Ingole Vs the Union of India, through Secretary, Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister and Ors.

Shri. Pralhad Gundhar Ingole Vs the Union of India, through Secretary, Petroleum and Natural Gas Minister and Ors.

Kot Bahar Masjid Trust, through Chief Trustee, Mursaleen N. Jalal Vs the Chief Executive Officer, Maharashtra State, Wakf Board and Ors.

Vishal Rajendra Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Sambhajirao Shinde Sarvajanik Vachnalaya, through President, Bhimrao Jetyappa Shinde Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vishnu Manga Dobade Vs Chief Officer, Trimbak Municipal Council and Ors.