Disposed

Vilas Dewu Gavkar and Ors. v. the Tahsildar, Devgad and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Nov 2016WP/3122/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged notices regarding construction. The court directed the Collector to examine the record, hear parties, and pass a reasoned order within four weeks, maintaining status quo.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Collector to take a decision after hearing parties and pass a reasoned order within four weeks; status quo maintained for four weeks.

Vilas Dewu Gavkar and Ors. Vs the Tahsildar, Devgad… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2016)

907-wp-3122-16

pdp

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 3122 OF 2016

¶6

Vilas Dewu Gavkar and ors. .. Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Tahsildar and ors. .. Respondents

¶9

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1018 OF 2016 IN

¶10

WRIT PETITION NO. 3122 OF 2016

¶11

Shri Narayan Juvatkar .. Applicant

¶12

In the matter

¶13

Vilas Dewu Gavkar and ors. .. Petitioners

¶14

Vs.

¶15

The Tahsildar and ors. .. Respondents

¶16

Mr. Sachin S. Punde for petitioners. Ms. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for State. Mr. S. A. Sawant for applicant in CAW No. 1018 of 2016. Mr. Parag Vyas a/w Mr. A. R. Varma for respondent no.6 – UOI.

¶17

CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL & M. S. KARNIK, JJ. NOVEMBER 17, 2016.

907-wp-3122-16

P.C.

1. The petitioners are aggrieved by certain

¶22

communications/notices issued by the Sub Divisional Officer, Kankavali in respect of construction/reconstruction carried out by the petitioners in Survey No.1 Hissa No.44/3 of village Bandewadi, Post Girye, Taluka Devgad, District - Sindhudurg.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that a detailed representation, addressed to the Collector, Sindhudurg, has been submitted.

¶24

Mr. Ashok Gajanan Shelke, Incharge Tahsildar, Deogad, District Sindhudurg has filed affidavit in reply dated 21/6/2016.

¶25

Without expressing any opinion, we direct the Collector, Sindhudurg to take appropriate decision after going through the relevant record, representation filed by the petitioners. The petitioners are entitled to file a fresh comprehensive representation in respect of the subject matter of the petition. The Collector shall hear the parties. We direct that a

¶26

¶27

907-wp-3122-16

¶28

reasoned order be passed by the Collector in respect of the subject matter within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of order. The parties to

¶29

maintain status quo in respect of the subject structure for a period of four weeks.

¶30

With the aforesaid directions, petition is disposed of.

¶31

Registry to communicate the order to the Collector, Sindhudurg, by fastest mode.

¶32

Civil Application No. 1018 of 2016 does not survive and disposed as such.

¶33

( M. S. KARNIK, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.)

Vilas Dewu Gavkar and Ors. v. the Tahsildar, Devgad and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vilas Dewu Gavkar and Ors. v. the Tahsildar, Devgad 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

Shaikh Abdul Kadar Khaja Shaheb and 7 Ors. Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and 9 Ors.

Shiv-Shaila Co-Op. Hsg. Society Ltd. and Anr. Vs the Municipal Commissioner and 3 Ors.

M/S. Unimmedss Vs State of Maharshtra and Anr.

Satsang Co-Operative Hou. Soc. Ltd, through Power of Attorney Holder, Shri. D. R. Sawai Vs the Pune Municipal Corporation, Pune, through Commissioner and Ors.

M/S. Jai Shreeram Developers, through Partners and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Dept of Urban Development and Ors.

Dhanaji Dattatray Gurao @ Dhanaji Dattoba Shirke Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.