IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY (AURANGABAD BENCH)
Mangesh S. Patil, S.G. Chapalgaonkar, JJ.
Masudeo - Appellant
Versus
State Of Maharashtra & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 11923 of 2018
Decided On : 06-02-2023
Notification - Land Revenue Code - Section 4 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, Section 24 of the Bombay General Clauses Act - 4
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks declaration that the impugned notifications dated 07-11-2017 and 31-08-2018 are bad in law and contrary to the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. The notifications pertain to the creation of a separate revenue village, Joshi Vasti, from the village Limpangaon.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the publication of the draft notification required under section 4 of the Code had been made in accordance with the law. The objections to the intended action under such notification were raised and considered. The court concluded that there is no merit in the writ petition and dismissed it.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the impugned notifications and the compliance with the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code in creating a separate revenue village.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the publication of the draft notification required under section 4 of the Code had been made in accordance with the law, and the objections to the intended action under such notification were raised and considered. The court also found that the compliance with the provisions of the Forest Act and Rules was not impeded by the action taken by the respondents under the impugned notification.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.
JUDGMENT
S.G. Chapalgaonkar, J. - By way of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking declaration that the impugned notification dated 07-11-2017 issued by the respondent No. 4 i.e. the Additional Collector, Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar is bad in law and contrary to the provisions of Section 4 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code" for the sake brevity) and Section 24 of the Bombay General Clauses Act.
2. The petitioner is also seeking declaration that the impugned order dated 23-08-2018 passed by the respondent No. 4 i.e. Additional Collector, Ahmednagar in file No. Rev/Office/Land-1B/OA/ Maha./Village/158/2018 and the notification dated 31-08-2018 in file No. Rev/Office/Land-1B/1627/2018 issued by the respondent No. 4 is contrary to the provisions of law.
3. The petitioner further seeks issuance of writ of certiorari to quash and set aside the impugned notification dated 07-11-2017 as well as the impugned order dated 23-08-2018 and draft notification dated 31-08-2018.
4. The case of the petitioner is that the Government of Maharashtra vide order dated 31-12-1989 allotted the land from Gut No. 52/1 for rehabilitation of 179 persons belonging to backward class. The plot area admeasuring around 1 Are was allotted to each of the beneficiaries subject to certain terms and conditions. The land is a part of revenue village, Limpangion and known as Joshi Vasti.
5. The respondent No. 8 moved an application dated 30-01-2015, to carve out Joshi Vasti having population of about 2000 to 2500 including 500 to 600 voters from village Limpangaon and create separate revenue village and Gram Panchayat. In pursuance of the application, the Collector, Ahmednagar/Respondent No. 3 issued instructions for conducting the enquiry and to submit a report. The Circle Officer, Kasti, Tal. Shrigonda submitted his report dated 16.05.2016 to Tahsildar along with a resolution of village panchayat, Limpangaon for formation of Joshi Vasti as a separate Gram Panchayat and revenue village. The respondent No. 6/Tahsildar, Shrigonda forwarded the said report to the Sub Divisional Officer/respondent No.5.
6. The respondent No. 4 issued a notification dated 07-11-2017 in tune with section 4(1) of the Code thereby calling upon objections in requisite format from general public till 23-11-2017. The notification was published on notice board of Tahsil office at Shrigonda as well as the office of village panchayat at Limpangaon. However, the controversy arose in respect of the manner of publication of the notification dated 07-11-2017. The objection was raised that no such publication was made till 06-12-2017. The report submitted by Talathi regarding compliance of directions regarding publication of notice was disputed. In view of various objections received from the villagers as well as the Shrigonda Sugar Factory, the respondent No.3/Collector directed to cause the enquiry regarding the objections in the office of respondent No.4. The hearing of all stakeholders was conducted. During such hearing, the written objections submitted by the stakeholders were discussed. After deliberations respondent No.5 / Sub Divisional Officer forwarded his recommendations for formation of Joshi Vasti as a separate revenue village. Based on the enquiry report submitted by respondent No 5, Additional Collector, Ahmednagar rejected objections vide order dated 23-08-2018. Consequently, final notification dated 31-08-2018 under section 4(4) of the Code was issued thereby creating Joshi Vasti as a separate revenue village.
7. The petitioner raises challenge to the draft notification dated 07-11-2017 issued in tune with section 4(1) of the Code by the Additional Collector, Ahmednagar as well as the final notification dated 31-08-2018 issued under section 4 (4) of the Code thereby carving out Joshi Vasti as a separate Gram Panchayat and the revenue village. It is the contention of the petitioner that th
Prashant Bhausaheb Ghiramkar Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2013 (6) MhLJ 703
AI
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the compliance with the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, particularly regarding the publication of draft notifications and con....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the lack of jurisdiction of Consolidation Authorities over forest land notified under Section-4 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, and the vesting of ....
The court reaffirmed that the notification under the Indian Forest Act validly vested land with the State, and the appellate authority exceeded its jurisdiction by setting aside unchallenged notifica....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the power of the State Government to reserve forest land or wasteland under Section 3 of the Indian Forest Act, 1927, and the consequences of vesti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for proper representation in the Grampanchayat and the impact on the overall growth and development of the area, leading to the cou....
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.