Bombay High Court
Grampanchayat Bavada And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 17 October, 2022
Author: Sharmila U. Deshmukh
Bench: Nitin Jamdar, Sharmila U. Deshmukh
1/3 50 wp 9484 of 2015.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.9484 OF 2015
Grampanchayat Bavada and Anr. .. Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Respondents
......
Dr.Uday P. Warunjikar a/w. Ms.Sonali R. Chavan, Advocate for the
Petitioners.
Ms.M.S. Bane, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4.
Mr.Dilip Bodake, Advocate for Respondent Nos.10 to 12.
Mr.Vishwajeet S. Kapse a/w. Mr.Shailesh D. Chavan, Advocate for
Respondent Nos.5, 6, 8, 9 and 13 to 27.
......
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATED : 17 October 2022.
P.C. :
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Digitally signed by RAJESHRI RAJESHRI PRAKASH
2 Petitioner No.1 is a Gram Panchayat. Petitioner No.2 is a PRAKASH AHER AHER Date:
2022.10.21 18:30:05 +0530 resident of village Bavada, Taluka-Khandala, District-Satara. The Petitioners have questioned the exercise by the Hon'ble Minister Rajeshri Aher 2/3 50 wp 9484 of 2015.doc (Revenue) by passing an order dated 21 August 2014 whereby direction was given that the revenue record in respect of the land in question be corrected and the entry of Nageshwar Devsthan Inam Class-III be removed. So also the Inam land be converted into free hold land.
3 The Devsthan Inam is not a registered trust. However, it is not disputed that the temple is in existence since long, and, therefore, we cannot come to the conclusion that Petitioner no.2 being the resident of the village and a devotee will have no locus whatsoever to protect the interest of Devsthan Inam. The impugned order refers to the fact that old revenue records show that the land i.e. survey no.1069 admeasuring 15.89 Hectors is Class-III Inam. Names of certain persons were also included in the 7 x 12 extract. According to the Petitioners, these persons were the priests. According to the private Respondents, they are statutory tenants. The impugned order also refers to the order/ communication of the Collector Satara dated 18 October 2001, whereby it was directed that in the revenue records of the land, entry of Devsthan Inam be made and accordingly mutation entry no.1562 was carried out. Thereafter upon the Application made by the private respondents to the Hon'ble Minister, the impugned order is passed. The Application filed before the Hon'ble Minister is not on record. Therefore, it is not discernible which provisions the Applicants have invoked to approach the Hon'ble Minister directly. Since the Rajeshri Aher 3/3 50 wp 9484 of 2015.doc Application is not before us, it is also not discernible as to why the private Respondents have not questioned the order dated 18 October 2001. It is also not placed before us under which provision the party can directly approach the Hon'ble Minster in respect of changes of revenue record and conversion of Devasthan Inam Class-III into free hold land. The reply filed by the State is entirely sketchy, which does not deal with most of the issues referred to above. Therefore, we direct the Respondent-State to produce Application filed before the Hon'ble Minister, whether the notices of such Application was given to any person who wanted to oppose the order passed by Collector Satara dated 18 October 2001, the revenue record in respect of the properties prior to 2001, and, thereafter these documents be placed on record along with an affidavit to be filed by the Collector Satara.
3 We are informed that the private Respondents are in possession. Till this aspect is conclusively settled, the private Respondents will not create any third party right in the property.
4 Stand over to 24 November 2022.
SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. NITIN JAMDAR, J.
Rajeshri Aher