1

WP6067-16

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO. 6067/2016

(RAMDAS BALIRAMJI MASNE VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANOTHER)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

Court's or Judge's orders

appearances, Court's orders of directions

and Registrar's orders

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Shri S.S. Alaspurkar, counsel for the petitioner.

Shri A.M. Balpande, A.G.P. for the R-1 & 2.

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND

MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : NOVEMBER 30

, 2016.

By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a

declaration that the action on the part of the respondent no.2

in asking the petitioner to produce the no objection certificate

of the revenue officer for entering his name in the revenue

records is illegal.

The learned counsel for the petitioner states

that the issue involved in this case was also involved

in a bunch of writ petitions bearing Writ Petition No.1252

of 2015 and others and this Court has, by the judgment

dated 14.01.2016, allowed the writ petition and held

that the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records could not

have directed the petitioners therein to produce the no

objection certificate. In this case also, the petitioner has

purchased the property on 01.01.2015 and, hence, the

amended provisions of section 37-A of the Maharashtra Land

Revenue Code, 1966 would not be applicable to the case of

the petitioner.

2

WP6067-16

Hence, for the reasons recorded hereinabove and

for the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 14.01.2016 in

a bunch of writ petitions bearing Writ Petition No.1252 of

2016 and others, this writ petition is also allowed. The

petitioner would be required to submit a photostat copy of the

sale-deed to the respondent no.2 to point out that the sale-

deed was executed before 03.03.2015. The respondent no.2

is directed to mutate the name of the petitioner in the

revenue record without seeking the no objection certificate.

Order accordingly. No costs.

JUDGE

JUDGE

APTE