Dismissed

Shri. Ashiq Husain Akbaral Ali Bohari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry Development and Ors.

Bombay HC25 Jun 2018WP/11033/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging alleged change of user of land from veterinary hospital. Court relied on affidavits stating new building exists for same purpose and recorded possession as owners, thus finding no grievance survives.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of as grievance of change in user does not survive the facts recorded in affidavits.

Shri. Ashiq Husain Akbaral Ali Bohari and Ors. Vs the State… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

2 wp 11033.12.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.11033 of 2012

¶4

Shri Ashiq Husain |Akbaral Ali Bohari and ors. …...Petitioners versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. …...Respondents

¶5

Mr. Drupad S. Patil, advocate for the petitioners. Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP for the State. Mr. Anand S. Kulkarni, advocate for the respondent No.3. Mr. M. S. Prabhune i/b. Mr. Sarang Satish Aradhye, advocate for the respondent No.4.

¶6

CORAM : RANJIT MORE & SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, JJ. DATE : 25^th JUNE, 2018.

¶7

P. C. :

¶8

The predecessor-in-title of the petitioners, by registered document dated 25^th March, 1918, handed over possession of land admeasuring about 30 gunthas from revisional survey No.93 to Local Board for the purpose of construction of veterinary hospital on a condition that the user shall not be changed. The possession of the said property was given without consideration. Under the said document, the owner of the land was entitled to resume that property in case of change of user/owner of the said land.

¶9

The petitioners have approached this Court making grievance that the property was initially transferred by the Local Board to Zilla

¶10

Shubhada S Kadam 1/2

¶11

2 wp 11033.12.doc

¶12

Parishad and, thereafter, by Zilla Parishad to the Animal Husbandry Department. It is also the grievance of the petitioners that the user of the said land is changed and it is no longer used for veterinary hospital.

¶13

The Zilla Parishad as well as the Government have filed affidavit-in-reply and contested the petition. They have stated that in the year 2012, a new building is constructed on the said land and the premises are being uses for veterinary hospital. They denied that there is change in the user in respect of the said land. The learned AGP as well as learned counsel for the Zilla Parishad specifically stated that the name of the Commissioner, Animal Husbandry, Maharashtra State, is recorded in the said property as Wahiwatdar only. The name of the petitioners is recorded as owners of the said property in the record of rights of the said property. In the light of the above, the grievance as regards change of the user, no more, survives. The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

¶14

[SMT.ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.] [RANJIT MORE, J.]

¶15

2/2

¶16

Shubhada S Kadam

Shri. Ashiq Husain Akbaral Ali Bohari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry Development and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Ashiq Husain Akbaral Ali Bohari and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry Development 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

Sadanand Laxman Mulgaokar and 5 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Sadanand Laxman Mulgaokar and 5 Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and 5 Ors.

Baijabai Narayan Shinde and Anr. Vs Karmaveer Dadasaheb Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. and 4 Ors.

Shri. Ashiq Husain Akbaral Ali Bohari and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Agriculture, Animal Husbandry Development and Ors.

Bashir Moosa Patel Vs the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 4 Ors.

Madhukar Bapu Gurav and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra and 17 Ors.