Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
VIBHA KANKANWADI, HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR
Pundlik Sambhaji Telange – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Revenue and Forest Development Mantralaya – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.
1. Both these writ petitions, involving identical questions of fact and law, are being disposed of by this common judgment. The petitioners in these petitions invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the respondent authorities to regularize their alleged encroachments upon gairan (grazing) land on the basis of the Government Resolution dated 28.11.1991 issued by the State of Maharashtra.
2. In Writ Petition No. 13465 of 2025, the petitioners seek regularization of their occupation over land bearing Gut No. 224, situated at Village Aasadvan, Tq. and Dist. Nanded. In Writ Petition No. 13468 of 2025, the petitioners claim regularization over lands bearing Gut Nos. 33, 34 and 71, situated at Village Gadadgavan, Tq. Jintur, Dist. Parbhani. According to the petitioners, the said lands are gairan lands belonging to the State.
3. The petitioners aver that they belong to Scheduled Caste communities, are landless agricultural labourers, and fall below the poverty line. They state that they have allegedly been in occupation of the government lands for several decades and, therefore, their e
Encroachment on government land cannot be regularized under Article 226 without meeting legal criteria, emphasizing that delay and lack of eligibility undermine claims for land tenure.
Limited scope of review applications and the need for compliance with government policies and regulations regarding encroachments on government land.
Regularization of unauthorized occupation of government land cannot be claimed as a matter of right, especially when public interest is involved, and applications must be evaluated based on the law i....
Encroachers cannot claim regularization of land as a matter of right; discretion lies with the Collector to evaluate hardship based on existing land holdings.
Unauthorized occupation of government land cannot create rights, and mere communal use does not justify settlement under the OPLE Act, especially when the land is earmarked for public developmental p....
Unauthorized occupation of government land does not confer entitlement to settlement unless criteria specified by government policies are met.
Illegal occupation of Gram Panchayat land does not confer any right to claim ownership or regularization.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
