Allowed

Shri. Govind Dahinaji Gaikwad (Since Decd) Thorugh Lrs. Malhari Govind Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Dept. of Revenue and Forest and Ors.

Bombay HC4 Dec 2019WP/3142/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge held violation of natural justice as petitioner was not informed of transfer of appeal record from Pune to Aurangabad before dismissal pet CERTNO - 915 wp 3142 - 15 was set aside and matter remanded to settlement commissioner at Pune.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 25th September 2014 set aside. Matter remanded to Deputy Director of Land Records (Settlement Commissioner) Pune Division for fresh hearing within three months.

Shri. Govind Dahinaji Gaikwad (Since Decd)… — Labour and Industrial Disputes | Bombay HC (2019)

915 wp 3142-15

Priya Soparkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.3142 OF 2015

¶6

Shri Govind Dahinaji Gaikwad … Petitioner V/s.

¶7

The State of Maharashtra and ors. … Respondents

¶8

Mr.P.S.Dani, Senior Advocate with Mr.Prajakt M. Arjunwadkar for the Petitioner. Mr.C.D.Mali, AGP for Respondent Nos.1,2 and 3-State. Ms.Anjali S.Ranade, Advocate for Respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶9

CORAM : UJJAL BHUYAN, J. DATE : DECEMBER 04, 2019.

¶10

P.C.:-

¶11

Heard Mr.P.S.Dani, learned senior counsel instructed by Mr.Prajakt M. Arjunwadkar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.C.D.Mali, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1,2 and 3. Also heard Ms.Anjali Ranade, learned counsel for respondent Nos.5 and 6.

¶12

By filing this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner has assailed legality and correctness of order dated 25^th September, 2014 passed

¶13

Priya Soparkar 2 915 wp 3142-15

¶14

by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad Division in proceeding No. Land Survey/ Appeal/ Pune/SR/ 2037/2012.

¶15

Against the mutation entry in favour of the petitioner under the Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947, respondent Nos. 4,5 and 6 preferred appeal before the District Inspector of Land Records, Pune in Consolidation Appeal No.1514 of 2011 in which petitioner was the opponent. Appeal was allowed by order dated 14^th February, 2012.

¶16

Aggrieved by the appellate order dated 14^th February, 2012, petitioner preferred further appeal before Deputy Director of Land Records (Settlement Commissioner), Pune Division, Pune, which was registered as R.T.S. Appeal No.2037 of 2012.

¶17

Grievance of the petitioner is that without any notice to the petitioner and without prior intimation, the record of the appeal was transferred to the office of the Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad Division where in the absence of the petitioner impugned order dated 25^th September, 2014 was passed dismissing the

¶18

Priya Soparkar 3 915 wp 3142-15

¶19

appeal of the petitioner and affirming the order dated 14^th February, 2012.

¶20

Aggrieved, present writ petition has been filed.

¶21

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and on

¶22

due consideration, court is of the view that before transfer of the appeal record the appellant i.e. the petitioner ought to have been put on notice. Respondents have not been able to show that petitioner was informed that the appeal record would be transferred from Pune to Aurangabad. When the petitioner was not informed of such transfer, naturally he could not be expected to be present at the time of hearing in Aurangabad. Viewed thus, there is violation of the principles of natural justice which has vitiated the impugned order dated 25^th September, 2014.

¶23

Consequently, impugned order dated 25^th September, 2014 is hereby set aside.

¶24

Matter is remanded back to the forum of Deputy Director of Land Records (Settlement Commissioner) Pune Division, Pune, who shall hear the appeal afresh.

¶25

Priya Soparkar 4 915 wp 3142-15

¶26

Since the contesting parties are before the court, let them appear before Deputy Director of Land Records (Settlement Commissioner) Pune Division, Pune on 23^rd December, 2019 on 10.30 a.m. whereafter the Appellate Authority shall proceed with the appeal and decide the same one way or the other within a period of three months from the date of appearance.

¶27

Respondents to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

¶28

Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶29

(UJJAL BHUYAN, J.)

Shri. Govind Dahinaji Gaikwad (Since Decd) Thorugh Lrs. Malhari Govind Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Dept. of Revenue and Forest and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. Govind Dahinaji Gaikwad (Since Decd) Thorugh Lrs. Malhari Govind Gaikwad v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Dept. of Revenue and Forest and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rama Motiram Bhoir Decd Thru Lr and Ors. Vs the Jt. Dist. Registrar, Co-Op. Soc. (Mofa ) Cidco, Navi Mumbai and Ors.

Ramdas Patilbuva Kotwal Vs Balasaheb Dhondiba Kotwal and Ors.

Smt. Shimgu Janu Vayde and Ors. Vs M/S. M.A. Planks through Partners M.H. Baqvi and Ors.

Bhavik Bhimjiyani Vs Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund and 4 Ors.

Neelkanth Realty Private Limited. Vs Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund and 4 Ors.

Rashmi Bhimjyani Vs Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund and 4 Ors.