( 1 ) TODAY the petition is listed for hearing on interim relief. On 5-7-2005, this petition was heard for motion hearing and it was then adjourned to enable the A. G. P. to produce the record and also to enable the respondents to file reply, interim relief in terms of prayer clause (C) was granted. On 13-7-2005, on hearing the respective counsel, Rule was granted and interim relief which was granted on 5-7-2005 was ordered to be continued. In response to rule nisi, the respondent No. 1 has filed reply and contested the petition. Though, this petition was listed for orders for hearing on interim relief, the learned counsel for the respective parties requested that instead of hearing as to continuation or vacating the interim relief, the petition itself may be disposed of finally. Accepting the request, I proposed to dispose of the petition finally.

( 2 ) THE petitioners by this petition have impugned the order passed by the divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad in Case no. 09/a/2004/n/tribal passed on 30-5-2005 in respect of land S. No. 11/1 Gat no. 16 at village Nichpur, Tq. Kinwat, District Nanded. It is contention of the petitioner that the proceedings which are initiated by the authorities under the maharashtra Restoration of Land to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to restore the land to the respondent No. 1 are void ab initio and illegal and taken without jurisdiction. It is contended that on the date of the sale deeds the respondent No. 1s tribe "naikda" was not recognised as S. T. , hence he is not entitled for restoration of the land. In other words it is contended that the provisions of the Act are not at all attracted to the facts of the present case and as such the orders passed by the authorities below thus without jurisdiction and the authorities below have assumed the jurisdiction and entertained the application filed by the respondent No. 1 and as such the orders are required to be set aside.

( 3 ) TO understand the above contentions of the petitioners, few undisputed facts which are borne by record required to be noted :- the land i. e. S. No. 11 admeasuring 13 acres 20 gunthas situate at Nichpur, now Gat No. 16 (hereinafter referred to as the suit land) was of the ownership of one Digamber who by registered sale deed dated 23-6-1969 sold it to the respondent No. 1 herein. After the land was purchased by the respondent No. 1, he sold the suit land to the petitioners by two different sale deeds. First sale deed was executed in the year 1969 which was to the extent of 5 acres, and by second sale deed dated 20-3-1970, 8 acres 20 gunthas of suit land was conveyed or transferred to the petitioners, thus the respondent No. 1 transferred entire suit land to petitioners.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to respondent No. 1 the two sale deeds executed by him were between the tribal and non-tribal and as such the provisions of Maharashtra restoration of Land to S. T. Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as Act) are attracted. Thus he initiated proceeding to seek restoration of suit land, which he has transferred in favour of petitioners by abovereferred sale deeds. During the proceeding respondent No. 1 who claimed to be a tribal expressed his inability to get back the land and he did not proceed with the application which he has filed for restoration of the suit land. Accordingly, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kinwat dropped the proceedings. Thus, the first round of the litigation under the Act came to an end.

( 5 ) THEREAFTER, the present proceedings were initiated by the authorities under the Act. The S. D. O. Kinwat, initiated this proceeding to revise the order dated 7-7-1976. The S. D. O. Kinwat, after noticing the parties and after recording the statement of the parties came to the conclusion that the transfer of the land being within the specified dates and it is affected between the tribal and the non- tribal, as such the tribal is entitled for restoration of land under section 3 of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document