Petitioners sought writ relief for return of land acquired for a student's hostel allegedly unused for its purpose. The bench clarified that acquired land vests in the State and surplus land can be used for any other public purpose. The petition was dismissed as devoid of merit.
Petition dismissed as devoid of merits.
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.
Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 14140 OF 2018
Yashwant Balwant Gaikwad and ors. .. Petitioners Vs. The Collector, Sangli and ors. .. Respondents
Mr.Kuldeep Nikam, for the Petitioners.
Ms.Geetanjali Koli I/b Mr.Vijay Killedate, for Respondent No.2. Mr.V.S.Gokhale, 'B' panel AGP for Respondents No. 1, 3 & 4.
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, CHIEF JUSTICE & M.S.KARNIK, J.
DATE : 18th DECEMBER, 2018
P.C. :
. The Petitioners by filing this Petition under Article
226 of the Constitution of India are praying for appropriate directions to the Respondents to transfer/return the subject land
to the Petitioners as the said land is not being used for the
purpose for which it was acquired.
1/4
survey No. 294 Hissa No. 3B admeasuring 1 acre 4 gunthas and 1 anna situated in the territorial limits of Sangli, Miraj, Kupwad City Corporation presently having extended city survey No. 712 was acquired by Respondent No.4 – State of Maharashtra for the specific purpose of construction of Mahatma Gandhi student's hostel.
attention to the newspaper report that the Respondents are now in the process of utilising the remaining vacant acquired land for
2/4
the purpose of construction of memorial statue of a late politician. The Petitioners objected to the change of use. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners urged that as purpose for which the land was acquired no longer subsists, the Petitioners are entitled for return of remaining unused land.
3/4
issue is no more resintegra in view of the decision of the Apex Court in the case of State of Kerala (supra) . In view of the admitted position that the land in question was acquired under the Act, by operation of Section 16 of the Act, it stood vested in the State free from all encumbrances. It is settled law that if the land is acquired for the public purpose, after public purpose was achieved, the rest of the land can be used for any other public purpose.
(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)
4/4
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to return of land acquired for a specific public purpose that ceased to exist.
Whether remaining unused acquired land can be utilized for any other public purpose after the original purpose is achieved.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Kerala and ors. vs. M. Bhaskaran Pillai and anr.Explained¶6
State of Kerala and ors. Vs. M. Bhaskaran Pillai and anr. AIR 1997 Supreme Court 2703 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Yashwant Balwant Gaikwad and ors.
The Collector, Sangli and ors.
NARESH H. PATIL
M.S. KARNIK
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
