Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
A.S. Chandurkar, J
Vilas S/o Narayanrao Belgamwar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to identical orders regarding mutation entries. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments on mutation entries and need for hearing. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court emphasizes due process in mutation entries. (Para 6) |
| 4. conclusion: writ petitions allowed. (Para 7) |
ORAL JUDGMENT
1.Since identical orders are challenged in these writ petitions, they are being decided by this common judgment.
2. RULE. Heard finally with consent of the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioners are aggrieved by the action of the respondent nos.1 and 2 of recording a mutation entry against the properties purchased by the petitioners so as to indicate that the transactions in question are in breach of provisions of Sections 36 and 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (for short, ‘the Code’).
3. For the sake of convenience, facts in Writ Petition No.7869 of 2017 are being referred to. The respondent no.3 who is a tribal had sought permission of the Collector seeking conversion of the lands owned by him for non-agricultural use. Permission under Section 44 (1) of the Code came to be granted. Thereafter the said land was divided into various plots forming part of a layout. The petitioners c
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
