Disposed

Govind Sopan Girme and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC21 Jun 2019WP/8034/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court at Aurangabad disposed of a writ petition by directing the Tahsildar, Shrirampur to decide a pending application regarding land measurement and instructing the Collector to intervene if there is non-action.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed by directing the Tahsildar to decide the pending application dated 24.11.2011 and directing the Collector to intervene in case of non-action.

Govind Sopan Girme and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Land Acquisition | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶2

WRIT PETITION STAMP NO.1523 OF 2015

¶3

Govind Sopan Girme and ors.

¶4

.. Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and ors.

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

Mr S.L. Bhapkar, Advocate for petitioners Mr V.S. Badakh, A.G.P. for respondents no.1 to 6

¶9

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 21.6.2019

¶11

PER COURT :

¶12

Considering the limited issue raised in the petition, with the consent of learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.P., petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission

¶13

By inviting our attention to copy of the representation submitted by the petitioners to the Tahsildar dated 24.11.2011, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner no.1 Govind Sopan Girme, petitioner no.2 Mahesh Paman Girme and petitioner no.3 Chandrabhan Mahadeo Girme along with other persons submitted an application to the Tahsildar requesting the Tahsildar to

¶14

2 1523,15wpst

¶15

undertake the exercise of measurement of the land so that the parties would be in a position to specify their shares in the property as legal representatives of deceased Geetabai and then would be at liberty to approach the authorities for issuing 7/12 extracts in their favour. The learned Counsel further submitted that the copy of the said application was also submitted to the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Shrirampur, Circle Officer, Shrirampur as well as the Collector office, Ahmednagar. The learned Counsel then submitted that in spite of lapse of sufficient period, as the parties were not taking any action, the petitioners had left with no choice but to approach this Court by filing present writ petition in the year 2011.

¶16

Considering this limited grievance, without going into the other contentions raised in the petition, and the directions which we propose to issue, would not cause any prejudice to the respondents who are State authorities, we direct respondent no.4 Tahsildar, Shrirampur to decide the application dated 24.11.2011 submitted by the petitioners to him. The petitioners are at liberty to submit fresh copy of this application/reprsentation to the Tahsildar, Shrirampur, considering the fact that during the passage of five years, there is every possibility that the office of the Tahsildar may not be having the application available for ready reference. We further permit the

¶17

3 1523,15wpst

¶18

petitioners to approach the Collector, Ahmednagar if there is no response from the Tahsildar, Shrirampur on the application for a considerable period, within four weeks thereafter. We direct that in case such a grievance is raised before the Collector about non-action of respondent no.4 Tahsildar, Shrirampur the Collector, Ahmednagar to look into the matter and then issue appropriate directions to his sub-ordinate authorities.

¶19

With these directions, the petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶20

( R.G. AVACHAT, J.) ( PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

¶21

vvr

Govind Sopan Girme and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govind Sopan Girme and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Shri Balaji Typewriting Institute, Beed Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mukund Shankarlal Dayma Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shakuntala Govindrao Nade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Ratan Anandrao Suradkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Poonam Chagan Khedkar Vs Jai Hind Education Trust Dhule through Its Chairman and Others

Manoj Chintaman Chaudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others