Bench disposed of a PIL seeking protection of Gairan land, dismissing it as lacking a public cause. Court held that since the land was already pending before Revenue Authorities, petitioners could not be permitted to participate in those proceedings to which they were not parties.
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.
997-PIL-35-2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.35 OF 2023
SAYYAD NAYUM SAYYAD MUSA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY AND OTHERS
Mr. P. D. Bachate, Advocate for Petitioners
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for the Respondents/State
CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE: 08.06.2023.
PER COURT :-
1. We have considered the submissions of Shri Bachate,
the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Petitioners. With
his assistance, we have gone through the petition paper-book and
the cause that is sought to be espoused.
2.The Petitioners intend to convey to us that their desire
is to protect the Gairan land situated in Gut No.105, Hingoli,
Taluka and District Hingoli. They are aggrieved that the person
who was allocated the portion of that land, has indulged in
creating third party interests. On deeper scrutiny of this Public
Interest Litigation paper book, we have noticed that the person
1 of 2
(( 2 ))997-PIL-35-2023
who is alleged to have created third party interest, was before this
Court in Writ Petition No.4179 of 2010. By an order dated
26.09.2013, we have directed the Revenue Authorities to look into
the issue of the use of the Gairan land.
3.A proceeding is already pending before the Revenue
Authorities at the behest of another individual with regard to the
same Gairan land. The Petitioners pray that, they be granted an
opportunity of hearing and contest the review proceedings, which are
pending before the Deputy Collector since 2018.
4.In such facts and circumstances, we do not find that any
public cause is taken up in this petition and more so, when the same
Gairan land Gut No.105 is already subject matter of litigation before
the various Revenue Authorities. In a Public Interest Litigation, we
cannot permit the Petitioners to participate in judicial or quasi judicial
proceedings pending before the Revenue Authorities, to which the
Petitioners are not party.
5.In view of the above, this petition is dismissed.
[ Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ] [ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ]
SMS
2 of 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a PIL can be permitted when the subject land is already subject to pending proceedings before Revenue Authorities in which petitioners are not parties.
Whether an opportunity of hearing is necessary to permit petitioners to participate in pending quasi-judicial proceedings before Revenue Authorities.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Writ Petition No.4179 of 2010Referred¶15
Sayad Nayum Sayad Musa
The State of Maharashtra
Ravindra V. Ghuge
Y. G. Khobragade
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court