V.M.KANADE, S.C.GUPTE
Prashant Babusaheb Ghiramkar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
P.C. (S.C. Gupte, J.)
1. Rule. Returnable forthwith. By consent of Counsel, the Petition is taken up for final hearing.
2. By this Petition which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner is seeking an appropriate writ, order and direction, directing Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to shift the Headquarter and Sub-divisional Office at Daund as far as Daund and Purandar Taluka is concerned.
3. Petitioner is aggrieved by the Notification dated 26 June 2013 issued by Respondents in which the Headquarter and Sub-Divisional Office of Purandar and Daund Talukas is shown at Pune, though in the draft Notification, the Headquarter is shown at Purandar (Saswad).
4. Brief facts which are relevant for the purpose of deciding this Petition are as under :
On 26 June 2012, the State of Maharashtra issued a draft notification under Sub-section (4) of Section 4 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (“the MLR Code”) calling for objections and suggestions for constituting / modifying 183 Revenue sub-divisions in the State under Section 4 of the MLR Code. The Talukas of Purandar and Daund in Pune District were proposed to constitute one such sub-division with the sub-div
Union of India and another vs. Cynamide India Limited
Municipal Corporation Bhopal, M.P. vs. Misbahul Hasan and other
Sundarjas Kanyalal Bhathija and other vs. Collector, Thane Maharashtra and other
Tulsipur Sugar Co. Ltd. vs. National Area Committee, Tulsipur
State of Punjab vs. Tehal Singh and other
Prabha Shankar Dubey vs. State of M.P. (2004) 2 SCC 56
Ram Pal Kundu vs. Kamal Sharma
Union of India vs. Rajpal Singh
State of U.P. vs. Renusagar Power Co. (1988) 4 SCC 59
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.