HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
VIJAY MURLIDHAR BHAKARE AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS – Respondent
WP 4849/2019
['KULKARNI SANKET S', 'COPY SERVED ON GP', '', 'GP', 'BARDE PARAG VIJAY', 'R/ SERVED']
1 925-WP-4849-19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.4849 OF 2019
WITH CA/4590/2022 IN WP/4849/2019
VIJAY MURLIDHAR BHAKARE AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Sanket S. Kulkarni
AGP for Respondents – State : Mr. Y. G. Gujrathi
Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. P. V. Barde
...
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.
DATE : 13th SEPTEMBER, 2022
PER COURT :
1.
By this petition, petitioner impugns communication
dated 25/03/2013, issued by Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition
No.10), Ahmednagar, order dated 14/12/2017, passed by Divisional
Commissioner, Nashik in R.T.S. Appeal No.265/2017 and order
dated 28/02/2018, passed by respondent No.1 in Appeal
No.2018/Pra/Kra.24/L-7.
2.
Facts shorn of unnecessary details are as follows:-
Land of petitioners admeasuring 10 Acre 20 Gunthas
was leased to Godavari Sugar Mills. After implementation of the
Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (for
short ‘Ceiling Act’), all the lands with industrial undertakings were
taken over by the State Government and were given to Maharashtra
2 925-WP-4849-19.odt
State Farming Corporation. By way of policy decision, lands of
Maharashtra State Farming Corporation were decided to be returned
to original ex-lessors.
3.
Pursuant to said decision, petitioner submitted
application for returning of his land. At the time of lease i.e. on
02/10/1975, total area held by petitioners was 21 Acre 20 Guntha.
In the year 1978, 5 Acre 16 Guntha land was returned to ex-lessor
and 5 Acre 04 Guntha land was in possession of Maharashtra State
Farming Corporation. Petitioner, therefore, claimed remaining 5
Acre 04 Guntha land. Request of petitioner was rejected by Deputy
Collector by communication dated 25/03/2013, holding that land of
petitioner as on 02/10/1975 was 21 Acre 20 Guntha and 12 Acre 12
Guntha area was converted into irrigated land. Since there is one
family unit (husband, wife and three minor children), maximum
land holding can be 18 Acre and only 18 Acre land can be given to
petitioner. Land held by petitioner is 12 Acre 12 Guntha and earlier
he was given back 5 Acre 16 Guntha land, thus, total holding comes
to 17 Acre 28 Guntha. As only 18 Acre land can be given to
petitioner, 12 Guntha area is liable to be returned and since it is
less than 1 Acre, the same cannot be given as per Government
Resolution.
4.
Petitioners challenged this communication initially
3 925-WP-4849-19.odt
before Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad, which held that
it has no jurisdiction. Petitioners thereafter approached this Court
by filing Writ Petition No.5032/2015, wherein interim protection was
granted in favour of petitioners. Thereafter, petitioners approached
Divisional Commissioner, Nashik, by availing remedy under Section
247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, by filing R.T.S.
Appeal No.265/2017. Divisional Commissioner dismissed the appeal
filed by petitioners and respondent No.1 has dismissed
revision/appeal filed by petitioners. Hence, the present petition.
5.
I have considered rival submissions of learned advocate
for petitioners, learned advocate for respondent No.3 and learned
Assistant Government Pleader for respondents – State. Perused the
grounds raised in writ petition memo and the impugned orders.
6.
Record reveals that the impugned orders are
unreasoned orders. Contentions and/or grounds raised by
petitioners are not considered and dealt with by respondent Nos. 1
and 2, while passing the impugned orders. The contentions are
reproduced in impugned orders and by relying on guideline No.4.3,
which does not appear to be relevant, Divisional Commissioner has
rejected the appeal of petitioners.
4 925-WP-4849-19.odt
7.
Respondent No.1 also has not at all considered and
dealt with the grounds raised by peti