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

2005 Supreme(Bom) 365

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
DASHRATH GANGARAM WASANKAR
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Decided on 16/3/2005

Headnote:Maharashtra Land Revenue (Disposal of Government Lands) Rules, 1971 - Rule 43 - Allotment of Government land to encroachers. - Existing encroachment is a condition precedent to claim allotment of Government land under Rule 43. - The regularisation of encroachment of Government land and its allotment is regulated by Rule 43 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue (Disposal of Government Land) Rules, 1971, framed under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. Perusal of other provisions of this rule reveals that the encroacher has to pay assessment for entire period of encroachment and fine, he has to pay occupancy price and penal assessment. The provisions of Rule 43(1)(a)(vi) also required the encroacher to enter into an agreement in Form XIV. As per said form of the agreement the grantee is presumed to be a person, who has encroached for the purposes of cultivation or construction. Thus, grantee of land has to be an existing encroacher. Thus, existing encroachment is a condition precedent to claim allotment under the said rule. Petitioner was in possession of the land in question till execution of sale deed dated 10.11.1976 of his hut along with the right to occupy the plot in question to respondent No. 5. It is to be noticed that it was never the case of petitioner that after sale in November, 1976 the respondent No. 5 was his tenant and respondent No. 5 was residing on suit plot as his tenant. The case was very specific and it was alleged that respondent No. 5 has encroached on that portion. In any case construing petitioner as landlord encroacher and respondent No. 5 as his tenant only, will not be in consonance with the spirit of Rule 43 of Allotment Rules, and will defeat public policy behind such regularisation of encroachment. Even otherwise in the letter dated 7.3.1991, which is written by Collector to State Government, it is expressly mentioned that Nazul Surveyor as also Tahsildar found encroachment of respondent No. 5 and later on it has also been mentioned that land was not in possession of petitioner. The writ petition of the petitioner assailing order of the Government dated 2.9.1994 for regularisation of encroachment of respondent No. 5 is without merit and is dismissed.

Judgment

( 1 ) BY this Writ Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges the order passed by the respondent No. 2 Hon'ble Minister dated 2-9-1994, whereby the Hon'ble minister, has found that the land in dispute deserves to be allotted to the respondent No. 5, and has directed regularization of his encroachment by putting up appropriate proposal in that respect. The petitioner has further claimed a direction to the Government, Commissioner and Collector to hand over the possession of the plot Nos. 211 and 212 to him.

( 2 ) THE facts in brief are that - the petitioner claims that he was allotted plot no. 212, ad measuring 25 x 11ft, total 275 sq. ft. by Collector on 28-6-1972 for temporary period of three months on lease and it was in petitioners' possession as encroacher. He further mentions that on 26-4-1978 he requested the Collector for allotment of that land and he also applied for 895 sq. ft. of land from adjacent plot no. 211. The proceedings were registered and reports were called from the local authorities like Nagpur Improvement Trust, Nagpur Municipal Corporation town Planning and after receipt of the reports in favour of the petitioner, the collector, Nagpur submitted his report to the Government and the Government sanctioned it by its letter dated 8-3-1984, insofar as the land ad measuring 275 sq. ft. from plot No. 212 is concerned. He further mentions that 895 sq. ft. of land from plot No. 211 came to be allotted to him by Government by letter dated 16- 4-1988. The Collector as per the Government directives executed in his favour lease on 8-8-1988 on certain conditions in relation to occupancy under section 34 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. An agreement also came to be registered before the Sub Registrar on 14-8-1988.

( 3 ) IT is the case of the petitioner that he had constructed a temporary structure i. e. hut of wooden patties/planks on the plot No. 212, which was initially allotted to him for a period of three months, and after expiry of the period of three months, the Collector directed the petitioner to remove this structure and hence the petitioner demolished the structure and sold the same to the present respondent No. 5 on 10-11-1978, for consideration of Rs. 700/ -. It is the case, that the respondent No. 5 did not carry away the material, but took forcible possession of the plot and started residing in it in a temporary shed on plot No. 212. He further states that the Collector, called upon the petitioner to pay to the Government the cost of the plot and accordingly he deposited the amount of Rs. 6445/- on 30-10-1990 and Rs. 76,710/- on 24-10-1991as price of the land. He states that the respondent No. 5 in the meanwhile applied to the nazul Officer for regularization of his encroachment on plot No. 212, and the said officer as also the Collector several times informed the respondent No. 5 that the land is already allotted to the petitioner. The said respondent No. 5 filed Writ petition bearing no. 2754/1991, before this Court without joining the present petitioner as party. The petitioner therefore, applied for intervention in it and on 22-6-1992, the petition was disposed of by observing that there was no reason to interfere with the orders passed by the Government and Collector, granting land in favour of the petitioner. However, the State Government and Collector were directed to take decision on the application of the respondent No. 5 herein, within a period of 6 months by the High Court.

( 4 ) AFTER this decision of the High Court, the Collector, Nagpur called upon the respondent No. 5 and after hearing passed an order on 17-12-1992 allotting the land in favour of the petitioner and intimated the same to the Government pleader. Thereafter, on 20-9-1993, the Collector directed Nazul Tahsildar, to remove the encroachment of respondent No. 5 and to hand over the possession of the plot Nos. 211 and 212 to the petitioner. The Tahsildar, accordingly pr












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 Back to top