All Writ Petition (Civil)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BEFORE THE NATIONAL LOK ADALAT WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur $V/s.$ The Deputy Collector & Ors. ...Petitioner ....Respondent Mr. Nitin Padmakar Deshpande – Adv. for the Petitioner. Mr. B. V. Samant, AGP for State. Uttam R. Patil – DRO Pune. CORAM : S. M. MODAK, J. D. S. DESHMUKH, REGISTRAR (JUDICIAL-II) V. A. SATHE, DY. REGISTRAR, OSD AT CPC DATE : $11^{text{th}}$ DECEMBER, 2021 $overline{P}C$ .: Remove from board. $1.$ Place the matter before Regular Court. $2.$ (V. A. SATHE) (D. S. DESHMUKH) (S. M. MODAK, J.) O.S.D. at CPC Registrar (Judl.-II) (Judge)

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner V/s. The Deputy Collector Resettlement Pune District Pune and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Nitin P. Deshpande, for the Petitioner. Mr. R. S. Pawar, A.G.P. for the Respondent / State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ. DATE : 09 JUNE 2022 P.C. . Heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner. Issue notice to the Respondents returnable on 30 June 2022. Learned A.G.P. waives notice for all the Respondents. (SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur PETITIONER V/S The Deputy Collector And Ors RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE R.D. DHANUKA & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE M. G. SEWLIKAR, JJ DATE : 30th June, 2022 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 12/08/2022 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: UMESH SHRINIWAS MALANI Digitally signed by UMESH SHRINIWAS MALANI Date: 2022.08.20 13:31:24 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 *** *** Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner Versus The Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation) Pune & Ors. ...Respondents None for the petitioner. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & KISHORE C. SANT, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 12, 2022. P. C. : Matter is moved before this Court by way of a praceipe. In view of urgency, order is passed on praceipe itself. None for the petitioner. List the petition as per its own turn. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 12: SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Digitally signed by SHRIKANT SHRINIVAS MALANI Date: 2022.08.26 16:53:33 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner Versus The Deputy Collector (Resettlement) Pune, & Ors. ...Respondents *** Ms. Rachana Harpale i/by Mr. Nitin P. Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. V. S. Gokhale, B Panel Counsel (AGP), for the Respondent State. *** CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & KISHORE C. SANT, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 25, 2022. P. C. : Matter is moved before this Court by way of a praceipe. In view of urgency, order is passed on praceipe itself. Heard learned Counsel for Petitioner. Issue notice to the Respondents, making the same returnable on 06th October, 2022. Learned AGP waives notice for Respondent – State. Learned Counsel for Petitioner is permitted to serve the private Respondents, by way of any legally permissible mode of service, apart from Court service and to place on record service affidavit before next date. (KISHORE C. SANT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 15: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8623 OF 2021 Ankush Bapurao Thakur ...Petitioner Versus The Deputy Collector Resettlement Pune District Pune And Ors. ...Respondents Ms. Kanchan Phatak i/b Mr. Nitin Deshpande, for Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Gokhale, 'B' Panel Counsel for the Respondents-State. ---- CORAM : R.D.DHANUKA, AND M.M.SATHAYE, JJ. DATE : 18th JANUARY 2023 P.C. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service for the Respondent/State. Taken up for final disposal by consent. This petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking direction to the Respondents-State to delete the entries of 'reservation for project affected persons' from the other rights column of 7/12 extracts of the Petitioner's land admeasuring 2 Hectares and 72 Ares from Gat No. 112, situated at Village Takali Bhima, Taluka Daund, District – Pune. It is the case of the Petitioner that the subject matter land is falling in the benefited zone and as such it is kept under reservation SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Digitally signed by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2023.01.19 12:19:47 +0530 vide M. E. No. 505, for the allotment of project affected persons of Bhama-Askhed Irrigation project. It is further case of the Petitioner that because of such endorsement, he cannot deal with his land and Government has also not taken steps in last 24 years for acquisition and allotment of this land to the project affected persons. As a result, there is indefinite fetter/restriction on the Petitioner's right to enjoy subject matter land. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has invited our attention to various earlier orders passed by this Court viz. Order dated 17.09.2013 passed in Writ Petition No. 5207 of 2013, Order dt. 17.10.2018 passed in Writ Petition No. 2821 of 2018, Order dt. 14.08.2019 passed in batch of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 5763 of 2017, Order dt. 17.02.2020 passed in Writ Petition No. 1578/2020 1567, 1474, 1475 and 1476 all of 2020, Order dt.27.10.2020 passed in group of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 5077 of 2020, Order dt. 05.08.2021 passed in Writ Petition No.2508 of 2021, Order dt. 11.08.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 8629 of 2018, Order dt. 07.10.2021 passed in Writ Petition No. 1601 of 2021 and Writ Petition No. 716 of 2021, Order dt. 15.11.2021 passed in group of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 1332 of 2021 and latest Order dt. 02.03.2022 passed in group of Writ Petitions with leading Writ Petition No. 5507 of 2021. Perusal of all these orders show that this Court has taken consistent view that private lands of the citizens like Petitioner cannot be kept under continuous and indefinite fetter, without initiating any action for allotment to project affected persons. If the Respondent-State wants to allot any of these lands to project affected persons, necessary steps must be taken and completed in time bound manner, otherwise the subject matter land must be released from such endorsements on 7/12 extract. Learned AGP for the Respondent-State could not distinguish facts of the present matter from the facts of the above said cases. We are therefore, of the view that this matter is covered by aforesaid Judgments and Orders taking consistent view. In that view of the matter, we pass the following order : (i) The State Government is directed to complete the process of allotting the Petitioner's land which is declared as part of the benefited zone, for allotment to the project affected persons, if required, and the said process shall be completed within six months from today, without fail. (ii) It is further directed that if the Petitioner's land is not allotted as stated above, the mutation entries effected in its 7/12 extracts about reservation for project affected persons, be deleted without further reference to the Court within two weeks from the date of expiry of six months. It is directed that no further extension of time would be granted for the same. (iii) It is further directed that if the entire process of allotment of Petitioner's land is not over within a period of six months from today as stated above, the Petitioner whose land has been placed under the benefited zone, would be at liberty to deal with his said land in the manner he desires and the State Government shall not initiate any acquisition proceedings in respect of the Petitioner's land which is subject matter of this petition, after expiry of six months. (iv) It is further made clear that the Government Resolution dated 18th January, 2022 and 11th February, 2022 shall be read with this order, so far as its application to the Petitioner's land is concerned. (v) The Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule is made absolute in above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. (vi) All concerned to act on an authenticated copy of this order. [M.M.SATHAYE, J.] [R.D.DHANUKA, J.]

Order - Status 11: 28.wp.1806-09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.1806 OF 2009 Jitendra Narayanbhai Pokar. ..Petitioner. Versus Mr.Prakash Mavani and others. ..Respondents. Mr.Diwakar Dwivedi, Advocate i/b. Mr.Pravin Singhal, Advocate for the petitioner. Dr.F.R. Shaikh, A.P.P., for the Respondent - State. ... ... CORAM : 1: BILAL NAZKI AND A.R. JOSHI, JJ. DATE : 11TH AUGUST, 2009. P.C. :- Learned Advocate for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the Petition. Hence, Petition is allowed to be withdrawn and dismissed as such. [BILAL NAZKI,J.] [A.R.JOSHI,J.]

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10881 OF 2014 Shri. Ganesh Keshav Jog (since Decd) Through Lrs ....Petitioner V/S The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 10937 OF 2015 Shri Bajirao Kisan Daundkar And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6301 OF 2015 Shankarrao Govindrao Rananavare ....Petitioner V/S The Collector, Kolhapur District And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6302 OF 2015 Govindrao Shankarrao Rananavare (since Decd) Through Lrs. ....Petitioner V/S The Collector, Kolhapur District And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6303 OF 2015 Ganpatrao Govindrao Rananavare ....Petitioner V/S The Collector, Kolhapur District And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11843 OF 2015 Shri. Kisan Vishram Kad ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11844 OF 2015 Smt. Droupadabai Uttam Shelke And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9233 OF 2014 Shri Kantaram Bhausaheb Kad And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Urban Development Department And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12580 OF 2015 Shri Gangaram Bhiku Daundkar Through Poa Holder Shankar Daundkar And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12588 OF 2015 Shri Maruti Ganpat Amle Through Poa, Shri Ashok Kad And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6205 OF 2015 Shri. Gulab Shankar Mhaske And Ors. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1027 OF 2016 Shri Baban Rambhau Mohite Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1028 OF 2016 Shri Rajaram Ananda Mohite And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1030 OF 2016 Shri Balasaheb Bhau Jadhav And Ors. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2786 OF 2016 Shri. Laxman Gajanan Mohite And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2788 OF 2016 Shri Gorakh Vasant Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2785 OF 2016 Shri Sukhdeo Murha Darekar ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2790 OF 2016 Shri Rambhau Baban Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2784 OF 2016 Shri Sitaram Sopana Darekar ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2787 OF 2016 Shri Devchand Laxman Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2789 OF 2016 Shri Namdeo Sakharam Darekar And Ors. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11228 OF 2016 Shri. Mohan Baban Palande Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Respondent Secretary And Ors. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11224 OF 2016 Shri. Madhukar Balwant Palande And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11225 OF 2016 Shri. Sudam Ramrao Palande Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11231 OF 2016 Geetabai Vasant Palande ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary, Dept. Of Relief And Rehabilitation And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11229 OF 2016 Narshing Narayan Palande Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary Respondent And Ors WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 14209 OF 2016 Chandrakant Alias Kaluram Sadashiv Mutke ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 13466 OF 2017 Shri. Bhairu Namdev Darekar And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6369 OF 2015 Bandu Laxman Salgar (since Decd) Through Lrs. Ganpati B. Salgar (since Decd) Lrs. Jaysing G. Salgar ....Petitioner V/S The Collector, Kolhapur District And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3554 OF 2016 Shri Bhagwan Genu Argade And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11659 OF 2014 Shri. Bapu Balu Dhangar (bandgar) (since Decd) Through Lrs. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 8130 OF 2016 Ganpati Kedari Borage (decd) Through Lrs. ....Petitioner V/S Collector And Deputy Director For Rehabilitation And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9774 OF 2015 Anandrao Laxman Thorat And Ors Petitioner V/S State Of Maharashtra And Ors Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4804 OF 2015 Hari Ganpat Madne And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent Manoj Patil i/b Suman Yashavant Lengare For Petitioner A B Vagyani Government Pleader Writ Cell R.no. 1 To 5, 7 And 8 Vijay Dinkarrao Patil R.no. 6 . Pallavi Potnis R.no. 12a, 12b, 12d And 12e ,13 CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE & N.M. JAMDAR, JJ DATE : 25th July, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 31/7/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10881 OF 2014 Shri. Ganesh Keshav Jog (since Decd) Through Lrs ....Petitioner V/S The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 10937 OF 2015 Shri Bajirao Kisan Daundkar And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11843 OF 2015 Shri. Kisan Vishram Kad ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11844 OF 2015 Smt. Droupadabai Uttam Shelke And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9233 OF 2014 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12580 OF 2015 Shri Gangaram Bhiku Daundkar Through Poa Holder Shankar Daundkar And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12588 OF 2015 Shri Maruti Ganpat Amle Through Poa, Shri Ashok Kad And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6205 OF 2015 Shri. Gulab Shankar Mhaske And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1027 OF 2016 Shri Baban Rambhau Mohite Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1028 OF 2016 Shri Rajaram Ananda Mohite And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1030 OF 2016 Shri Balasaheb Bhau Jadhav And Ors. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2786 OF 2016 Shri. Laxman Gajanan Mohite And Ors Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2788 OF 2016 Shri Gorakh Vasant Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2785 OF 2016 Shri Sukhdeo Murha Darekar Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2790 OF 2016 Shri Rambhau Baban Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2784 OF 2016 Shri Sitaram Sopana Darekar Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2787 OF 2016 Shri Devchand Laxman Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2789 OF 2016 Shri Namdeo Sakharam Darekar And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 13466 OF 2017 Shri. Bhairu Namdev Darekar And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3554 OF 2016 Shri Bhagwan Genu Argade And Ors Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors Respondent Manoj Patil i/b Mrs Suman Yashavant Lengare For Petitioner AB VagyaniGovernment Pleader with P G Sawant,AGP with Ms G R Golatkar Asst AGP for State 1 To 5, 7 And 8 Vijay Dinkarrao Patil R.no. 6 Pallavi Potnis R.no. 13 Pallavi Potnis R.no. 12a, 12b, 12d And 12e For Respondent CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE & N.M. JAMDAR, JJ DATE : 11th September, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 25/09/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 8: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10881 OF 2014 Shri. Ganesh Keshav Jog (since Decd) Through Lrs ....Petitioner V/S The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 10937 OF 2015 Shri Bajirao Kisan Daundkar And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11843 OF 2015 Shri. Kisan Vishram Kad ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 11844 OF 2015 Smt. Droupadabai Uttam Shelke And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 9233 OF 2014 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12580 OF 2015 Shri Gangaram Bhiku Daundkar Through Poa Holder Shankar Daundkar And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12588 OF 2015 Shri Maruti Ganpat Amle Through Poa, Shri Ashok Kad And Ors ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6205 OF 2015 Shri. Gulab Shankar Mhaske And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1027 OF 2016 Shri Baban Rambhau Mohite Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1028 OF 2016 Shri Rajaram Ananda Mohite And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1030 OF 2016 Shri Balasaheb Bhau Jadhav And Ors. Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2786 OF 2016 Shri. Laxman Gajanan Mohite And Ors Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2788 OF 2016 Shri Gorakh Vasant Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2785 OF 2016 Shri Sukhdeo Murha Darekar Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2790 OF 2016 Shri Rambhau Baban Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2784 OF 2016 Shri Sitaram Sopana Darekar Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2787 OF 2016 Shri Devchand Laxman Hargude ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2789 OF 2016 Shri Namdeo Sakharam Darekar And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 13466 OF 2017 Shri. Bhairu Namdev Darekar And Ors. ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Ors. ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3554 OF 2016 Shri Bhagwan Genu Argade And Ors Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors Respondent R S Apte,Sr,Counsel with Manoj Patil i/b Mrs Suman Yashavant Lengare For Petitioner A B Vagyani Government Pleader with P G Sawant AGP with G R Golatkar & R S Sawant AAgP for R.no. 1 To 5, 7 And 8 Vijay Dinkarrao Patil R.no. 6 Pallavi Potnis R.no. 13 Pallavi Potnis R.no. 12a, 12b, 12d And 12e For Respondent CORAM : THE CHIEF JUSTICE & N.M. JAMDAR, JJ DATE : 25th September, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 26/09/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 13: Sequeira IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11659 OF 2014 Mr.Bapu Balu Dhangar - (since deceased) Through LRs. … Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 11225 OF 2016 Mr.Sudam Ramrao Palande. … Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 11224 OF 2016 Mr.Madhukar Balwant Palande and others. … Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 8130 OF 2016 Mr.Ganpati Kedari Borage (Decd) Through LRs. … Petitioners. V/s. Collector and Deputy Director for Rehabilitation and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 6303 OF 2015 Mr.Ganpatrao Govindrao Rananavare. … Petitioners. V/s. The Collector, Kolhapur District and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 6369 OF 2015 Mr.Bandu Laxman Salgar (since decd) Through LRs. … Petitioners. V/s. The Collector, Kolhapur District and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 6301 OF 2015 Mr.Shankarrao Govindrao Rananavare. … Petitioner. V/s. The Collector, Kolhapur District and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 6302 OF 2015 Mr.Govindrao Shankarrao Rananavare (since decd) through LRs. … Petitioners. V/s. The Collector, Kolhapur District and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 4804 OF 2015 Mr.Hari Ganpat Madne and others. … Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 11229 OF 2016 Mr.Narshing Narayan Palande. … Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 11228 OF 2016 Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 14209 OF 2016 Mr.Chandrakant alias Kaluram Sadashiv Mutke. … Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 295 OF 2017 in WRIT PETITION NO. 14209 OF 2016 Mr.Aba Yashwant Deshmukh … Applicant. V/s. Mr.Chandrakant @ Kaluram Sadashiv Mutke. … Respondent. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 9774 OF 2015 Mr.Anandrao Laxman Thorat and others. … Petitioners. V/s. State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION (Stamp) NO. 13466 OF 2017 Mr.Bhairu Namdeo Darekar and others. … Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. Along with WRIT PETITION NO. 3554 OF 2016 Mr.Bhagwan Genu Argade and others. … Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents. 3 sr.2 WP 11659-14 wt group....doc Mr.Sanjeev Kadam for the Petitioner in WP No.11659/2014. Mr.Vishwanath Talkute for Petitioners in WP No.4804 /2015. Mr.Vivek Salunkhe, for Petitioners in W.P. Nos.6301/2015, 6302/2016, 6303/2016 and 6369/2015. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar i/b Mr.Swapnil Mohite, for Petitioners in W.P. Nos.11224/2016, 11225/2016, 11228/2016, 11229/2016 and 11231/2016. Mr.S.R.Nargolkar i/b Mr.Omkar Amberkar, for the Petitioner in W.P. No.14209/2016. Mr.A.B.Vagyani – GP a/w Mr.P.G.Sawant – AGP a/w Ms.Geetanjali Golatkar – AAGP and Mr.Rohan Sawant – AAGP, for the State. Mr.P.D.Dalvi for Respondent Nos.5, 6A to 6D in in WP No.11659 / 2014. Mr.Manoj Patil i/b Ms.Suman Lengare, for Respondent Nos.7 and 8 in W P No.4804/2015. CORAM : DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J. & N.M. JAMDAR, J. DATE : OCTOBER 3, 2017. P.C. :- In this group of matters, since a common question of law arises, identical facts are involved and the reliefs claimed is the same, by consent of learned counsel for the parties, the Petitions are disposed of by this common order. The learned counsel for the parties have also advanced common submissions. The Petitioners have filed the Petitions under Article 226 of Constitution of India seeking relief under section 24(2) of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 ('Act of 2013'). They seek a declaration that acquisition proceedings have lapsed. The lands involved in these Petitions have been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the resettlement of project affected persons. The resettlement of project affected persons is carried out under the provisions of Maharashtra Project Affected Persons Rehabilitation Act 1999. Notifications under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were issued, thereafter followed by declaration under section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, Awards in all these proceedings were declared five years prior to 1 January 2014. Since relief is sought under section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, it will be necessary to reproduce the said section for ready reference- Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 reads thus :- "24. Land acquisition process under Act No. 1 of 1894 shall be deemed to have lapsed in certain cases- (1) ….......... (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where an award under the said Section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land has not been taken or the compensation has not been paid the said proceedings shall be deemed to have lapsed and the appropriate Government, if it so chooses, shall initiate the proceedings of such land acquisition afresh in accordance with the provisions of this Act; Provided that where an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of landholdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries, then, all beneficiaries specified in the notification for acquisition under Section 4 of the said Land Acquisition Act, shall be entitled to compensation in accordance with the provisions of this Act." Thus, three parameters are indicated in Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. First, the award should be published five years prior to the date of commencement of the Act, which date is 1 January 2014. Second, the physical possession of the land is not taken. Third, the compensation is not paid. In all the Petitions, the State has asserted that State has taken possession of the lands in question. In some cases the State has placed on record that possession has been handed over to project affected persons. The Petitioners dispute this position. It is not possible for us to decide this contested factual issue of possession in these Petitions. However, in the case of Santosh Dnyaneshwar Aher v/s. State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary & Ors. 1 Division Bench of this Court has taken a view that for application of Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, it is enough that either of the contingencies exist. That is, the possession of the land is not taken or compensation is not paid. This position is amply made clear by the Apex Court in the 1 . Writ Petition No. 3238 of 2015 dtd 17/01/2017 case of Delhi Development Authority v/s. Sukhbir Singh and Ors. 2 . In all these proceedings, the State has either filed affidavits or has placed a chart on record which has been counter signed by the learned Additional Government Pleader. These documents show that the compensation has not been paid to the Petitioners and the same is deposited in Personal Ledger Account or Revenue Account. It is an admitted position that in none of these petitions, compensation has been deposited in the court where reference under section 18 of Land Acquisition Act will lie. The aspect of compensation as regards Section 24(2) of Act of 2013 has been dealt by the Apex Court in the cases of Pune Municipal Corporation and Anr. v/s. Harakchand Misirimal Solanki and Ors. 3 and Delhi Development Authority v/s. Sukhbir Singh and Ors. The Apex Court analyzed the provision of Section 24 of the Act of 2013 and Section 31 of the Act of 1894. It was held that Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894, which envisages deposit of compensation in the Court, is a mandatory provision. As per Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894, if the compensation is not accepted or collected by the Claimant, the compensation has to be deposited by the Collector in the Court where the reference can be made under Section 18 of the Act of 1894. The Apex Court construed the phrase "compensation has not been paid " occurring in Section 24(2) of the 2 . AIR 2016 SCC 4275. 3. 2014(4) Mh. L.J.566 Act of 2013 as being "paid" as per Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894. The Apex Court laid down that if the compensation is not paid as per Section 31(2) of the Act of 1894, then Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013 is attracted and consequences of lapsing of acquisition contemplated under Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, will ensue. This view has been followed in subsequent decisions by the Apex Court and the Division Benches of this Court. In the result, the contention of the Petitioners that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed since the compensation is not paid as per Section 24(2) of the Act of 2013, will have to be upheld. Accordingly, Writ petitions are allowed holding that the Land Acquisition proceedings in respect of the lands in question have lapsed by virtue of section 24(2) of the Act of 2013. Writ Petitions are disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs. N.M. JAMDAR, J. CHIEF JUSTICE

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.6185 OF 2018 Sagar s/o. Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents. WRIT PETITION NO.6186 OF 2018 Kashinath s/o. Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr.S.C.Yeramwar for the petitioner in both the petitions. Mr.M.M.Pabale, AGP for the respondentState in both the petitions. CORAM: SHANTANU KEMKAR AND NITIN W.SAMBRE, JJ. DATE : JUNE 14, 2018 P.C.: Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable as per C.M.I.S. date. The learned AGP waives service on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. Reply to the petition be filed within four weeks. Steps of service of notice on respondent No.3 be taken within two weeks. Until the next date, no coercive steps be taken against the petitioner on the basis of the impugned order passed by the Caste Scrutinty Committee. List the matter as per C.M.I.S. date. (NITIN W.SAMBRE, J.) (SHANTANU KEMKAR, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6185 OF 2018 Sagar Arjun Thakur ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6186 OF 2018 Kashiram Arjun Thakur ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent Ms Anita Gavkar i/by Mr Yeramwar Sushant Chandrakantrao For Petitioner Mr P.G. Sawant AGP FOR R.no. 1 To 3 CORAM : A.S. OKA & SANDEEP KASHINATH SHINDE, JJ DATE : 6th December, 2018 P.C. : Await Service. Stand over to 17/01/2019. Ad-interim relief if any to continue till then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6185 OF 2018 Sagar Arjun Thakur ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6186 OF 2018 Kashiram Arjun Thakur ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent Mr Yeramwar Sushant Chandrakantrao, Advocate For Petitioners in both WP Mr Y S Khochare, AGP for R.no. 1 and 2 in both W.P.; Mr Ramesh D Rane, Advocate for R.no. 3 in WP/6185/2018. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 21st January, 2019 P.C. : At the request of learned advocate for the petitioners, Stand over to 04/02/2019. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4829 OF 2017 Ramesh Nana Morajkar ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6185 OF 2018 Sagar Arjun Thakur ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6186 OF 2018 Kashiram Arjun Thakur ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ....Respondent Mr Yeramwar Sushant Chandrakantrao, Advocate for Petitioners in above 3 WP. Mrs R A Salunkhe, AGP for R.no. 1 To 3 CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 18th February, 2019 P.C. : Office is directed to place the matters HIGH ON BOARD ON 25/02/2019 along with WP/4649/15 and WP/6842/15. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 15: (4)-WP-4829-17 & group.doc BDPSPS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4829 OF 2017 Ramesh Nana Morajkar ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6185 OF 2018 Sagar S/o Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6186 OF 2018 Kashiram S/o Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4649 OF 2015 Surendra Bhagwan Morajkar ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6842 OF 2015 Prafulla Vitthal Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH (4)-WP-4829-17 & group.doc CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3201 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6842 OF 2015 Prafulla Vitthal Thakur ..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.7643 OF 2015 Yogesh Shantaram More Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and another Respondents Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the Petitioners in all the Writ Petitions & for Applicant in Civil Application. Mr. P. G. Sawant, AGP for Respondent – State in all the Writ Petitions and Civil Application. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ. DATE: 25th FEBRUARY, 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) 1] Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Petitions are taken up for final hearing. 2] All these Writ Petitions impugn the orders passed by Respondent – Scrutiny Committee, thereby invalidating the claim of the Petitioners of belonging to Thakar Scheduled Tribe. Admittedly, all the Petitioners are members of one family. 3] It is the contention of the Petitioners that their blood relatives have been subsequently granted validity certificates. For a change, the Respondent – Scrutiny Committee, in its affidavit, has come with a reasonable stand. It is stated in the affidavit that in view of validity certificates having been subsequently granted in favour of the Petitioner's blood relatives, the Committee is willing to reconsider the issue. 4] In that view of the matter, Petitions are partly allowed. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside and the matters are remitted to the Respondent – Scrutiny Committee for deciding afresh in the light of the validity certificates granted in favour of the blood relatives of the Petitioners. Interim protection, which has been granted in favour of the Petitioners by this court on earlier occasions, shall stand continue till decision of the Committee and, in the event, decision of the Committee is adverse to the interest of the Petitioners, (4)-WP-4829-17 & group.doc for further period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the communication of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee. 5] Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. 6] Since Writ Petitions are partly allowed and disposed in the aforesaid terms, Civil Application No.3201 of 2015 taken out in Writ Petition No.6842 of 2015 does not survive and the same is also disposed of. (N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (B. R. GAVAI, J.)

Order - Status 16: (4)-WP-4829-17 & group-spk-minutes.doc BDPSPS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4829 OF 2017 (Modified as per order dated 8/4/2019) Ramesh Nana Morajkar ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6185 OF 2018 Sagar S/o Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6186 OF 2018 Kashiram S/o Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4649 OF 2015 Surendra Bhagwan Morajkar ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6842 OF 2015 Prafulla Vitthal Thakur Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others Respondents (4)-WP-4829-17 & group-spk-minutes.doc WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3201 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6842 OF 2015 Prafulla Vitthal Thakur ..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.7643 OF 2015 Yogesh Shantaram More ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and another ..Respondents Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the Petitioners in all the Writ Petitions & for Applicant in Civil Application. Mr. P. G. Sawant, AGP for Respondent – State in all the Writ Petitions and Civil Application. CORAM: B. R. GAVAI & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ. DATE: 25th FEBRUARY, 2019 ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) 1] Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Petitions are taken up for final hearing. 2] All these Writ Petitions impugn the orders passed by Respondent – Scrutiny Committee, thereby invalidating the claim of the Petitioners of belonging to Thakar Scheduled Tribe. Admittedly, all the Petitioners are members of one family. 3] It is the contention of the Petitioners that their blood relatives have been subsequently granted validity certificates. For a change, the Respondent – Scrutiny Committee, in its affidavit, has come with a reasonable stand. It is stated in the affidavit that in view of validity certificates having been subsequently granted in favour of the Petitioner's blood relatives, the Committee is willing to reconsider the issue. 4] In that view of the matter, Petitions are partly allowed. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside and the matters are remitted to the Respondent – Scrutiny Committee for deciding afresh in the light of the validity certificates granted in favour of the blood relatives of the Petitioners. The Respondent – Scrutiny Committee shall decide the matter on remand within a period of three months from the date of uploading of the order. Interim (4)-WP-4829-17 & group-spk-minutes.doc protection, which has been granted in favour of the Petitioners by this court on earlier occasions, shall stand continue till decision of the Committee and, in the event, decision of the Committee is adverse to the interest of the Petitioners, for further period of three weeks from the date of receipt of the communication of the order passed by the Scrutiny Committee. 5] Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. 6] Since Writ Petitions are partly allowed and disposed in the aforesaid terms, Civil Application No.3201 of 2015 taken out in Writ Petition No.6842 of 2015 does not survive and the same is also disposed of. (N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (B. R. GAVAI, J.)

Order - Status 17: (Prod)WP482917 & group.doc. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4829 OF 2017 Ramesh Nana Morajkar ..Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6185 OF 2018 Sagar S/o Arjun Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6186 OF 2018 Kashiram S/o Arjun Thakur Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.4649 OF 2015 Surendra Bhagwan Morajkar Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.6842 OF 2015 Prafulla Vitthal Thakur ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3201 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO.6842 OF 2015 (Prod)WP482917 & group.doc. Prafulla Vitthal Thakur ..Applicant Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO.7643 OF 2015 Yogesh Shantaram More Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and another Respondents Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar, Advocate for the Petitioners in all the Writ Petitions. Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP for Respondent – State in all the Writ Petitions and Civil Application. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ. DATE : 8th APRIL, 2019 P.C. 1] Not on board. Mentioned at 11:00 a.m. 2] Learned counsel for the Petitioners has moved this Court for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 25th February 2019. It is stated that after second sentence in 4th paragraph, the Court has dictated as under : " The Respondent – Scrutiny Committee shall decide the matter on remand within a period of three months from the date of uploading of the order. " 3] The contention appears to be correct. The said sentence be inserted after the second sentence in 4th paragraph. [DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.] [B. R. GAVAI, J.] BGP. 2 of 2

#VALUE!

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3165 OF 2017 ................... Sundari Somnath Salian .. Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Respondents .................... Mr. Sunil Karandikar for Petitioner. Mr. S.H.Kankal, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 4. None for Respondent No.5. CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J. DATE : NOVEMBER 23, 2022. P.C. : Heard Mr.Karandikar, learned Advocate for Petitioner. By Order dated 25.05.2008, Tahasildar granted access of 16 sq.mtr. for road to the Petitioner with one pre-condition that Petitioner shall keep the said area open and not construct any compound on the same seeking exclusivity. It is submitted that Respondent No.5 society being aggrieved, challenged the above condition before the Collector. By Order dated 19.09.2008, Collector confirmed the Order of Tahasildar rejecting the said challenge. By order dated 14.10.2009, Additional Commissioner dismissed the revision. In second revision before the State, specifically pertaining to the said condition which emanated from the order of the Tahasildar, the State passed order cancelling the original allotment and grant of 16 sq.mtr. area for road by Tahasildar to the Petitioner. Prima-facie it is seen that the subject matter in appellate proceedings and revision proceedings was limited to the extent of challenge to the condition only i.e. restricting the constructions of compound by Petitioner. In that view of the matter cancelling the original allotment of the subject land to the Petitioner was never in dispute or the subject matter of challenge in Appeal proceedings or in the subsequent revision proceedings. In view of the above, issue notice to Respondents. In addition to service of notice through Court, Petitioner shall serve Respondents by any permissible mode of service and file affidavit of service with tangible proof thereof before the returnable date. Mr. Kankal waives notice on behalf of Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Petitioner shall serve a copy of the order on Respondent No.5. In the meanwhile, impugned order dated 31.10.2014 shall stand stayed. Reply to be filed within four weeks from today. Rejoinder, if any, to be filed within one week thereafter. Stand over to 11th January, 2023. [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3165 OF 2017 Smt. Sundari Somnath Salian ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV J DATE : 11th January, 2023 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 15/02/2023 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3165 OF 2017 Smt. Sundari Somnath Salian ....PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV J DATE : 15th February, 2023 P.C. : Mentioned out of turn. At the request of the learned Counsel for the Petitioner/Respondent, stand over to 21/02/2023. Ad-interim relief, if any, to continue till the next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 12: 1 of 7 2-wp-3165-17 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 3165 OF 2017 Smt. Sundari Somnath Salian ..Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Sunil G. Karandikar for petitioner. Mr. Avinash H. Fatangare i/b. Archana S. Shelar for Respondent No.5. Mr. C. D. Mali, A.G.P. for the State/Respondent Nos.1 to 4. __________ __________ CORAM : SARANG V. KOTWAL, J. DATE : 10 MARCH 2023 PC : The petitioner herein has challenged the order dated 22/04/2014 passed by the Secretary and Special Executive Officer (Appeals) in the Revision Application S-30/2710/P.K.139/G-4 P.K.524(01)/2012/AVPU, as well as, the order dated 31/10/2014 rejecting the review of that particular order. The petitioner had requested for a road for accessing her plot at City Survey No.7754. The Tahsildar, Ambernath vide order dated 25/03/2008 directed that the plot admeasuring 16 Sq.mtr. from the plot No.81 owned by the respondent No.5 Society be allotted to the petitioner for a road accessing to her plot after depositing certain amount. That order was challenged by the respondent No.5 Society before the Collector, Thane. The said authority vide order dated 19/09/2008 rejected the objection raised by the society and upheld the order passed by the Tahsildar. However, vide Clause 3 of the said order dated 19/09/2008 it is clarified that the said portion could be used by the petitioner only for accessing her plot as a road to her plot. She was directed not to erect any compound around that particular portion. This particular clause of the Collector's order was challenged by the petitioner before the Additional Commissioner (Konkan Division) Mumbai. That appeal was dismissed vide order dated 14/10/2009 and the order passed by the Collector was confirmed. In this particular appeal before the Additional Commissioner, the petitioner had challenged only the restriction on putting up a compound around that portion. There was, of course, no challenge by the petitioner for grant of that particular portion for her use. The petitioner thereafter filed the Revision U/s.257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code 1966 (for short 'M.L.R.Code') 3 of 7 2-wp-3165-17 before the Government of Maharashtra. That Revision application was rejected vide order dated 22/04/2014. While rejecting that revision application, the Secretary and Special Executive Officer (Appeals) for Government of Maharashtra also set aside the orders dated 25/03/2008 passed by the Tahsildar, Ambernath, the order dated 19/09/2008 passed by the Collector, Thane and the order dated 14/10/2009 passed by the Additional Commissioner (Konkan Division) Mumbai. The petitioner then preferred a review application of that order before the same authority. That review was also dismissed. The petitioner in these circumstances has approached this court challenging the order passed by the Government of Maharashtra U/s.257 of the M.L.R. Code. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the State Government exceeded the scope of revision application preferred by the petitioner. The Government could only have taken into consideration the objection raised by the petitioner and the contentions raised by the petitioner. It was not open for the 4 of 7 2-wp-3165-17 Government to have considered the legality or validity of the order passed by the Tahsildar, Ambernath, the Collector, Thane and the Additional Commissioner (Konkan Division) Mumbai. Therefore, prejudice is caused to the petitioner because she was not given notice that all these three orders would be set aside by the impugned order. He further submitted that the Revisional Authority had taken into consideration Section 143 of the M.L.R. Code, but the petitioner was not heard and in consonance of the principles of natural justice, she at least deserved hearing before any adverse order was passed in her own revision application. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.5 submitted that the said respondent had filed their written submissions before the revisional authority, therefore, the petitioner was very much aware of the stand taken by the society. Therefore, the petitioner was not taken by surprise when the order was passed by the revisional authority. Learned counsel for the Respondent No.5 relied on the Judgment passed by a Single Judge of this Court in the case of Pandurang Chandrabhan Bauche and another Vs. Jalindhar Sarandhar Tupe & Ors. 1 to contend that the powers U/s.143 of the M.L.R. Code could be used only in respect of an agricultural land and not for the lands which are situated within the city limits. I have considered these submissions and I have perused the impugned orders passed by the revisional authority. The revisional authority has referred to Section 143 of the M.L.R. Code and has observed that the Tahsildar does not have power to pass any order in respect of a road leading to a plot which was not an agricultural land. To that extent, I do not find any infirmity in that order. However, the fact remains that the petitioner was not given any opportunity to make her submissions. Therefore, only to that extent and in the interest of justice, the petitioner deserves some hearing before any adverse order was passed by the revisional authority in the petitioner's own revision application. In such a case, the petitioner could have come up with other factual aspects of the matter and some solution could have been found between the parties. Some workable consequential relief could have been considered. The Judgment relied on by learned counsel for the 1 2009 (3) Mh.L.J. 467 Respondent No.5 also supports the reasoning given by the revisional authority. Therefore, legally, I do not see that the revisional authority had committed any error. The only difficulty is that the petitioner was not heard when an adverse order was passed in her own revision application. She was not put to notice that such order was contemplated. Therefore, only because of that, I am inclined to remand back this revision proceeding before the revisional authority. Except for the power of the Tahsildar U/s.143 of the M.L.R. Code referred to herein above, the other contentions of the petitioner, as well as, of the respondent No.5 are left open. It is also necessary to take care of the consequences of cancellation of the order passed by the Tahsildar which can be decided by the revisional authority and for that purpose it is also necessary to remand back the revision application to the revisional authority. Hence, the following order: O R D E R i) The Writ Petition is allowed. ii) The Revision Application filed by the petitioner is remanded back to the Revisional Authority. iii) It is made clear that, all other contentions of both the parties, except with reference to Section 143 of the M.L.R. Code, are left open. iv) The Revision Application shall be decided within a period of three months from today. v) The Writ petition is disposed of. (SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.)