Manoj Ganpat Sawardekar

Order - Status 2: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 16416 OF 2016 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Court's or Judge's orders Registrar's orders None present. CORAM : R. M. JOSHI REGISTRAR (JUDLI) Date : 21 NOVEMBER 2016 Three weeks time i.e. 13.12.2016 is granted to remove office objections. REGISTRAR (JUDLI) RJ I gpj / 21.11.2016

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO.16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant Petitioner Versus District Superintendent Land Record and others Respondents Mr. P. G. Kathane for the Petitioner. Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, AGP for the Respondents. CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 30th NOVEMBER, 2016 P.C. 1 Heard Mr. P. G. Kathane, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner. 2 Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 11.01.2017. In addition to service of notice through Court, the advocate for the Petitioner shall serve a private notice by Registered Post A.D. and/or by Courier service and/or by hand delivery on the Respondents and shall file affidavit of service before the returnable date. 3 The principal contention of the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the consolidation proceedings are sought to be reopened after a period of 45 years. The parties are put to notice that in view of the narrow controversy involved the Petition may be heard and disposed of (905)-WPST-16416-16.doc*.* finally at the admission stage. In the meantime, there would be adinterim relief in terms of prayer clause (c). [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant ....Petitioner V/S District Superintendent Land Record, Sangli And Ors ....Respondent Mr. Pramod Gokul Kathane, for Petitioner. Mr. Manoj Ganpat Sawardekar, for R.No. 4A to 4K. Mr. S.D.Rayrikar, AGP, for R.Nos. 1 & 2. Mr. Bharat A. Punekar, R.No. 3. CORAM : R.M. SAVANT., J DATE : 22nd February, 2017 P.C. : S.O. to 8th March 2017 for admission. To be placed on supplementary board. Ad-interim relief granted earlier, to continue until then. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION STAMP NO. 16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant ....Petitioner V/S District Superintendent Land Record, Sangli And Ors ....Respondent Ms Anusha A Kale i/b Shri Pramod Gokul Kathane For Petitioner Shri Akshay Bobade i/b Shri Bharat A Punekar R.no. 3 Shri S D Rayrikar, AGP R.no. 1 And 2 CORAM : R.M. SAVANT., J DATE : 8th March, 2017 P.C. : Stand over to 10/03/2017. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 11: wpst1641616(908) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION St. NO. 16416 OF 2016 Mrs. Janaki Subhash Sawant ..Petitioner Vs. District Superintendent Land Record Sangli & Ors ..Respondents Ms Arusha A Kale i/b Mr. P. G. Kathane for the Petitioner Mr. M. G. Sawardekar for the Respondent Nos.4A to 4E Mr. S. H. Kankal AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr. Akshay Bobade for the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 10th MARCH, 2017 P.C. 1 The Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to amend so as to annex a typed copy of the impugned order. Leave granted. Amendment to be carried out within one week. List the Petition for admission on 2132017, to be shown on the supplementary board. [R.M.SAVANT, J]

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3333 OF 2017 Mrs Janaki Subhash Sawant ..Petitioner Vs. District Superintendent Land Record, Sangli & Ors ..Respondents Mr. P. G. Kathane for the Petitioner Mr. S. D. Rayrikar AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr. M. G. Sawardekar for the Respondent Nos.4(a) to 4(f) Mr. Akshay Bobade a/w Mr/ B. A. Punekar for the Respondent Nos.3, 5(a) to 5(f), 6(a) to 6(e) CORAM : R. M. SAVANT, J. DATE : 21st MARCH, 2017 P.C. 1 The Writ Jurisdiction of this Court is invoked against the order dated 212016 passed by the District Superintendent of Land Records, Sangli, by which order the application for condonation of delay filed by the Respondent No.3 came to be allowed. The said order has been challenged on the ground that the District Superintendent of Land Record has condoned the delay merely on the ground that the principles of natural justice require that such delay is required to be condoned. The District Superintendent of Land Record has not come to a conclusion that the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 have shown sufficient cause for condonation of delay running into 45 years for discretion to be exercised in favour of the said Respondents. The application filed by the said Respondent No.3 was in respect of correcting the consolidation scheme which has been implemented in Village Bhose, Taluka Miraj, District Sangli, as long back as in the year 1965. The Petitioner and the Respondent No.3 are the sons of one Dashrath Bandgar who had two other sons namely Laxman Dashrath Bandgar and Bhauso Dashrath Bandgar. It seems that Laxman and Bhauso have expired and their heirs are the Respondent Nos.5(a) to 5(f) and Respondent Nos.6(a) to 6(e) to the above Petition. However, the statements of the sons of the said Dashrath Bandgar were recorded before the Assistant Consolidation Officer in the year 1965 and it is the case of the Petitioner that the consolidation scheme was propounded on the basis of the said statement which was recorded by the Assistant Consolidation Officer. 2 The Learned Counsel for the parties i.e. Mr. Kathane for the Petitioner and Mr. Bobade for the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 sought to make submissions against and for condonation of delay. 3 In my view, it is not necessary to delve into the said aspect since the District Superintendent of Land Records, Sangli has without coming to a conclusion that sufficient cause for condonation of delay has been made out by the Respondent Nos.3, 5 and 6 has condoned the said huge delay of 45 years. In my view, the interest of justice would be served if the impugned order dated 212016 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli for a denovo consideration of the application for condondation of delay. The parties may file additional pleadings if so advised before the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli. The parties to appear before the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli on 542017. The District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli thereafter may decide the application for condonation of delay by 155 2017 on its own merits and in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the instant order. Needless to state that the contentions of the parties are kept open for being urged before the District Superintendent of Land Records Sangli. 4 The Petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent and is disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]