The Bench held the writ petition not maintainable as the petitioner can approach the Civil Court for removal of encroachment on private property, though all contentions were kept open.
Petitioner directed to avail remedy under law available in civil court.
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.
916 sr.no..odt
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
916 WRIT PETITION NO.10397 OF 2019
GULAM DASTAGIR AZIZMIYA DESHMUKH AND ANOTHER VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Anil S. Bajaj AGP for Respondents: Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, Additional GP
. . .
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & K.K. SONAWAJE, JJ. DATE : 22ND AUGUST, 2019.
PER COURT:
We have heard Mr. Bajaj, learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner is claiming removal of encroachment on his private property. The contention is that the Government is trying to construct road on the private property of the petitioner.
If the possession of the petitioner on his private property is threatened, the petitioner can avail remedy before the Civil Court. In the light of that, writ petition is disposed of. Petitioner may avail the remedy available to him under law. All contentions of the petitioner are kept open.
[K.K. SONAWANE] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA] JUDGE JUDGE
grt/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether this writ petition is maintainable for seeking removal of encroachment when civil court remedies are available.
Gulam Dastagir Azimiyaa Deshmukh and Another
The State of Maharashtra
S. V. Gangapurwala
K. K. Sonawaje
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
