SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(SC) 330

KULDIP SINGH, M.N.VENKATACHALIAH, S.SAGHIR AHMAD
Pradip D. Prabhu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra – Respondent


ORDER

1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. There is almost consensus between the learned counsel that these matters be referred back to the Government of Maharashtra for fresh decision keeping in view the merit of each case. These petitions being public interest litigation have been filed on behalf of landless Aadivasis occupying various lands in various districts of Maharashtra. It is not disputed that the Aadivasis have encroached upon the land and further that the land under their possession is the forest land. It is alleged in the petitions that the Aadivasis have been in possession of the land since prior to1978. The claim of the petitioners is that the Government of Maharashtra have issued instructions from time to time where under it has been provided that the persons who are in possession of lands for a particular period of years their possession may be regularised in terms of the Government instructions Apart from that, it is not denied that the Government of India have also issued instructions dated 18-9-1990 laying down guidelines in this respect The petitioners only claim is that their cases for regularisation be considered in terms of the instructions issue







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top