Partly allowed

Sangamner Sahakari Audyogik Vasahat Marayadit through Its Secretary Balasaheb Gangadhar Gadakh v. the State of Maharashtra through the Collector and Others

Bombay HC28 Feb 2024WP/314/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Six writ petitions challenged a common Deputy Collector's order passed without hearing the Petitioner. The Court quashed and set aside the impugned orders, restored the matters to the District Collector, Ahmednagar, directed appearance on 11/03/2024, kept contentions open and sought decision within six months.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sangamner Sahakari Audyogik Vasahat Marayadit through Its… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-AUG:4612-DB

¶2

213.24wp etc

¶3

(1)

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

911 WRIT PETITION NO. 213 OF 2024

¶6

SANGAMNER SAHAKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT MARAYADIT, THROUGH ITS MANAGER BALASAHEB GANGADHAR GADAKH

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

¶9

AND

¶10

912 WRIT PETITION NO. 222 OF 2024

¶11

SANGAMNER SAHAKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT MARAYADIT THROUGH ITS MANAGER BALASAHEB GANGADHAR

¶12

GADAKH VERSUS

¶13

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

¶14

AND

¶15

913 WRIT PETITION NO. 246 OF 2024

¶16

SANGAMNER SAHAKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT MARAYADIT THROUGH ITS MANAGER BALASAHEB GANGADHAR GADAKH VERSUS

¶17

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

¶18

AND

¶19

914 WRIT PETITION NO. 314 OF 2024

¶20

SANGAMNER SAHAKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT MARAYADIT THROUGH ITS SECRETARY BALASAHEB GANGADHAR GADAKH

¶21

VERSUS

¶22

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

AND

213.24wp etc

(2)

916 WRIT PETITION NO. 335 OF 2024

¶27

SANGAMNER SAHAKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT MARAYADIT THROUGH ITS MANAGER BALASAHEB GANGADHAR GADAKH

¶28

VERSUS

¶29

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

¶30

AND

¶31

917 WRIT PETITION NO. 365 OF 2024

¶32

SANGAMNER SAHAKARI AUDYOGIK VASAHAT MARAYADIT THROUGH ITS MANAGER BALASAHEB GANGADHAR

¶33

GADAKH

¶34

VERSUS

¶35

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE COLLECTOR AND OTHERS

¶36

Mr Shivaji T. Shelke, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr S. B. Narwade, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr P. B. Shirsath, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3A to 3C in WP/ 213/2024, for Respondent No.3 in WP/222/2024, for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 in WP/246/2024, for Respondent Nos.3A and 3B in WP/335/2024, for Respondent No.3 and 4 in WP/365/2024

¶37

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND R. M. JOSHI, JJ.

¶38

DATE : 28th February, 2024

¶39

PER COURT:

¶40

These matters were heard for some time.

¶41

In Writ Petition No.314/2024, as Respondent No.3 is

¶42

dead, the Petitioner desires to delete Respondent No.3 from the

¶43

(3)

¶44

213.24wp etc

¶45

Petition. As such, deletion is permitted at the risk of the Petitioner.

¶46

In Writ Petition No.335/2024, Respondent No.3-c Radhakisan Bhaurao Arote is no more. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner prays for leave to delete the deceased person. As such, deletion is permitted at the risk of the Petitioner.

¶47

The undisputed position that emerges from the record is, that the Petitioner was not heard when the common impugned order dated 27/10/2023 was passed by Respondent No.2/Deputy Collector, Ahmednagar. The Petitioner needs an opportunity of hearing, considering the lands at issue.

¶48

The learned Advocate representing the private individual Respondents, submits that, the rejoinder affidavit of the Petitioner contains many issues, that have been raised. All these issues can be gone into by the District Collector, if a re-hearing is ordered, since the Petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing.

¶49

In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances, all these Writ Petitions are partly allowed . The impugned orders

¶50

213.24wp etc (4)

¶51

in all these Petitions are quashed and set aside and the matters are restored to the file of the District Collector, Ahmednagar.

¶52

All the parties shall appear before the District Collector, Ahmednagar on 11/03/2024 at 12:00 noon in the remitted proceedings. Separate notices need not be issued to the Petitioner and the private Respondents, who have appeared through their Advocates in these matters. All the contentions of the litigating parties are kept open.

¶53

Considering the Circular dated 14/09/2012, the District Collector shall endeavour to decide the proceedings within a period of six months from the date of appearance of the litigating parties and shall pass a reasoned order. The contention

¶54

of the Petitioner that the proceedings with reference to the deceased persons stand abated, shall be considered by the District Collector while deciding the said proceedings.

¶55

(R. M. JOSHI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶56

sjk

¶57

Signed by: Sachin J Kulkarni Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 05/03/2024 12:13:36

Sangamner Sahakari Audyogik Vasahat Marayadit through Its Secretary Balasaheb Gangadhar Gadakh v. the State of Maharashtra through the Collector and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sangamner Sahakari Audyogik Vasahat Marayadit through Its Secretary Balasaheb Gangadhar Gadakh v. the State of Maharashtra through the Collector and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hiralal Deochand Dhanawat Died through Lrs Govind Hiralal Dhanawat Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Rajkumar Govinda Pradhan Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Priyanka Pandharinath Lagad and Anr. Vs Vishwanath Baburao Tak and Ors.

Sanjay Shankarrao Shinde Vs the Chief Executive Officer and Others

Rustum Narayan Harne and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Sangamner Sahakari Audyogik Vasahat Marayadit through Its Manager Balasaheb Gangadhar Gadakh Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Collector and Others