Bombay High Court
Kisan/ Krishna Bhagu Kadam vs State Of Maharashtra on 5 April, 2023
Author: Gauri Godse
Bench: R. D. Dhanuka, Gauri Godse
Digitally signed
by VARSHA
VARSHA VIJAY
RAJGURU
VIJAY Date:
RAJGURU 2023.04.11
11:20:30
+0530
1/5
2-cp-33-2021-iast-6909-2023.doc
varsha IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 33 OF 2021
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION(ST) NO. 6909 OF 2023
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 479 OF 2022
Kisan Krishna Bhagu Kadam ... Petitioner
vs.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors ... Respondents
Mr. A.R. Gole, a/w Dimple Tejani, i/b Mr Sanjay Anabhawane,
for the Petitioner.
Mr. N.P. Deshpande, for the Petitioner in CP/479/22.
Dr Birendra Saraf, AG, a/w Mr P.P. Kakade, GP, a/w Mr Bupesh
V. Samant, AGPfor Applicant in IAST/6909/23 and
Respondents in CP/33/21, Mr A.I. Patel, Addl GP for
Respondent-State in CP/479/22.
Mr G.S. Hegde, Senior Advocate a/w P.M. Bhansali, for
Respondent-CIDCO in both CPs for Intervenor.
CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA AND
GAURI GODSE, JJ.
DATED : 5th APRIL, 2023 P.C. :-
1. Mr Hegde, learned Senior Counsel for CIDCO tendered copy of order dated 12th January, 2023 passed by this Court in Review Petition(St) No. 19146 of 2022 in Writ Petition No. 3171 of 2021 and in Review Petition(St) No. 15237 of 2022. Learned ::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2023 09:19:45 ::: 2/5 2-cp-33-2021-iast-6909-2023.doc senior counsel submitted that the notifications were not placed on record when the Writ Petitions were decided. Moreover, the Writ Petitions were decided on the basis of Affidavit filed by the Deputy Collector, Raigad which states that the land was never allotted to CIDCO and that CIDCO has entered into possession of part of the land. Notification placed on record will have to be considered in the Petition. It is averred that the relevant facts were not brought to the notice of this Court while passing order under review. This Court accordingly reviewed and recalled the order dated 1st April 2022 and directed the Petitioner to implead CIDCO as party in the original Writ Petition. This Court further made it clear that with regards to the land at Koynawele, the parties may take further steps.
2. Learned senior counsel submitted a copy of Notification dated 20th March 1971 in support of his submission that so far as village Pendhar is concerned, the said village was already designated as a site for a proposed new town known as ' New Bombay' as in the year 1971. He thus, submitted that the portion of land allotted was already earmarked for new town 'New Bombay'.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner on the other hand ::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2023 09:19:45 ::: 3/5 2-cp-33-2021-iast-6909-2023.doc invited our attention to the submissions made by learned senior counsel in para 4 of the order dated 12th January 2023 and admitted that CIDCO has no claim over the land in the village Koynawele.
4. We direct the Petitioner in Writ Petition No. 3171 of 2021 to implead CIDCO as a party Respondent in compliance of the order passed on 12th January 2023 by this Court in Review Petition (St) No. 19146 of 2022 within one week from today.
CIDCO would be at liberty to file Affidavit in Reply within two weeks from the date of Petitioner carrying out amendment and implead CIDCO as party Respondent. Rejoinder shall be filed within one week thereafter. Mr Gole, learned counsel for the Petitioner in Contempt Petition No. 33 of 2021 invited our attention to the averment made by the State Government in the Affidavit in Reply dated 26th July 2022, more particularly in Paragraph No.4. It is averred that the land was allotted at Pendhar to Project Affected Person by the Additional Collector, Raigad. The said allotment was however cancelled by the Additional Collector, Raigad. This Court set aside the said cancellation order of Additional Collector and thus this land is not available for allotment.
::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2023 09:19:45 ::: 4/5
2-cp-33-2021-iast-6909-2023.doc
5. In view of the stand taken by the State Government in the said Affidavit in so far as land of Pendhar are concerned, we direct the State Government to file Affidavit to make its position clear whether the land at Pendhar is allotted to CIDCO or Project Affected Persons. If according to the State Government, lands offered to the Petitioner were already ear marked for CIDCO and those lands cannot be made available for the Petitioner, in so far as Petitioner in Contempt Petition No. 33 of 2021 is concerned, the learned Advocate General on instructions states that Petitioner can contact Additional Collector, Raigad on 12th April 2023 at 11:00 a.m when the Petitioner would show certain plots which may be available for the purpose of the allotment to the Petitioner. The said process be completed within one week from the date when Petitioner is called upon to identify suitable land. Upon completion of the visit, the Petitioner to identify one of those plots within 48 hours. The State Government to take decision whether such plot identified by the Petitioner can be allotted to the Petitioner and within how much time the process of allotment of such identified land shall commence and be completed expeditiously. Petitioner would be at liberty to give option of one plot out of the said plots shown to the Petitioner.
::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2023 09:19:45 ::: 5/5
2-cp-33-2021-iast-6909-2023.doc
6. At this stage, Mr Gole, learned counsel for the Petitioner in Contempt Petition No. 33 of 2021, states that his client is ready and willing to complete this exercise without prejudice to the rights and contention of the Petitioner to claim allotment of their lands as mentioned in Contempt Petition. Statement is accepted.
7. Place the matter under the caption of 'Direction' on 20 th April 2023 to inform this Court about progress in the matter.
(GAURI GODSE, J.) (R. D. DHANUKA, J.)
::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2023 09:19:45 :::