Disposed

Ramesh S/O Shriram Suradkar and 11 Others v. State of Maharashtra, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and 2 Others

Bombay HC8 Feb 2022WP/8513/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought directions for the petitioners to continue occupying E Class lands. The court directed the Collector at Akola to consider the petitioners' request for regularisation of their occupation expeditiously, following earlier PIL directions and a specific Supreme Court judgment, on a fixed date.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed with directions to the Collector to consider the petitioners' request for regularisation of land occupation expeditiously and communicate the decision.

Ramesh S/O Shriram Suradkar and 11 Others Vs State of… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

8-WP-8513-19

¶2

1/3

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.8513 OF 2019

¶5

Ramesh S/o Shriram Suradkar Aged about 62 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶6

Sudarshan S/o Pralhad Suradkar, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶7

Madhukar S/o Bhakar Gawai, Aged about 62 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶8

Shalikram S/o Punjaji Suradkar, Aged about 52 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶9

Baban S/o Pralhad Ambhore, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶10

Dilip S/o Narayan Sonone, Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶11

Suresh S/o Tulshiram Kamble, Aged about 40 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶12

Arun S/o Shriram Suradkar, Aged about 55 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶13

Madhukar S/o Vishwanath Suradkar, Aged about 62 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶14

Gokarnabai wd/o Chokharam Suradkar, Aged about 60 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶15

Udyasing S/o Namdev Jadhav,

¶16

8-WP-8513-19

¶17

2/3

¶18

Aged about 45 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶19

Vatsalabai wd/o Ramrao Chavhan, Aged about 45 years, Occ. Agriculturist

¶20

All resident of Pimpalgaon Chambhare, Tah. Barshitakli, District Akola

¶21

… Petitioners

¶22

-vs-

¶23

State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32

¶24

Collector, Akola, Tah. And District Akola

¶25

Tahsildar Barshitakli, District Akola … Respondents.

¶26

Shri O. Y. Kashid, Advocate for petitioners. Smt H. N. Jaipurkar, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.

¶27

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, JJ. DATE : February 08, 2022

¶28

Judgment : (Per : A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

¶29

In view of notice for final disposal issued earlier, the writ petition is taken up

¶30

for hearing by issuing Rule and making the same returnable forthwith.

¶31

Heard.

¶32

The petitioners have approached this Court seeking a direction that they may be permitted to continue their occupation of E Class lands at Survey Nos.42 and Survey No.1 at Mouza Pimpalgaon Chambhare, Tahsil Barshitakli, District Akola. Inviting attention to the order passed in Public Interest Litigation No.89/2013 (Kal

¶33

8-WP-8513-19

¶34

3/3

¶35

Ke Liye, Main Line, Amravati vs. The Collector, Amravati and ors.) it is submitted that this Court had permitted ascertainment of the status of the petitioners therein to consider their entitlement to regularisation of their occupation in similar circumstances.

¶36

On 01/02/2022 time was granted to the learned Assistant Government Pleader to consider whether similar course as followed in Public Interest Litigation No.89/2013 could be followed in the present writ petition. Today the learned Assistant Government Pleader on instructions submits that similar course could be followed in the present matter.

¶37

Accordingly by following the directions that were issued in Public Interest Litigation No.89/2013 to consider the grievance of the petitioners, they are directed to remain present before the Collector at Akola on 23/02/2022 after which the Collector shall consider the request made by them expeditiously keeping in mind the relevant policy decisions as well as the judgment of the Honourable Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh and ors. vs. State of Punjab and ors. AIR 2011 SC 1123. The decision taken be communicated to the petitioners.

¶38

With aforesaid directions the writ petition is disposed of. Rule accordingly. No costs.

¶39

(Pushpa V. Ganediwala, J.) (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

¶40

Digitally signed byASMITA ADWAIT BHANDAKKAR Signing Date:09.02.2022 Asmita 17:35:48

Ramesh S/O Shriram Suradkar and 11 Others v. State of Maharashtra, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh S/O Shriram Suradkar and 11 Others v. State of Maharashtra, Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anup Ganesh Warodkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Vocational Education and Training Department, Nagpur and 2 Ot

Vibha Ganpatrao Jangdhurve Vs the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli through Chief Executive Officer and Another

Vitthal R. Tapase Vs the Zilla Parishad, Wardha through Chief Executive Officer and Another

Sanjay S/O Sadashiv Kharchan Vs Shri. Sourabh Katiyar, Chief Executive Officer, Zp, Akola

Mayur S/O Ashok Kumar Shrivastav Vs Pranali W/O Mayur Shrivastava

Yogita W/O. Liladhar Pimpalshende Vs the Maharashtra Election Commission New Admn. Building, Thr. Secretary, Mumbai and Others