Bombay High Court
Shivaji Dnyaneshwar Nikam vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 8 December, 2020
Bench: A.A. Sayed, Surendra P. Tavade
7.WP(ST).94995.2020.doc
Digitally
signed by
Aarti Aarti G.
Palkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
G. Date: CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
2020.12.16
Palkar 11:17:38
+0530 WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO.94995 OF 2020
Shri. Shivaji Dnyaneshwar Nikam ....Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Manoj A. Patil for the Petitioner.
Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, AGP for the Respondent-State.
CORAM : A.A. SAYED AND
SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATE : 8 DECEMBER 2020
P.C. :
1. The Petition has been fled seeking the following relief:-
"This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue appropriate writ, order and or direction and to direct the Respondents No.2 to 4 to delete/remove the reserve remark entry of resettlement of the project afected persons into the 7x12 extract of Gat No.719/1 (area of 59R) situated at Mouje Chinchoshi, Tal.Khed, Dist. Pune."
2. Pursuant to the State Government publishing a Notifiation under Seition 11 of the Maharashtra Resettlement of Projeit Displaied Persons Ait, 1976 deilaring the afeited zone and benefted zone and afeited zone, the subjeit lands were shown as reserved for Projeit Afeited Persons in the other rights iolumn in the 7x12 Forms/Extraits.
3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has invited our attention to Order dated 14.08.2019 in Aananda Kashinath Shukhla Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No.5763 of 2017 and ionneited Petitions). He has also relied upon the Order dated 17.09.2013, in Smt. Aarti Palkar 1/2
7.WP(ST).94995.2020.doc Chandrabhaga Nathu Sakhare & Ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No.5207 of 2013); (ii) order dated 17.10.2018, in Tatyaba D. Ruke Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No.2821 of 2018); (iii) order dated 23.02.2018, in the iase of Hiraman Chandu Barne Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No.14265 of 2017).
4. In the present iase, the entries have been refeiting in the 'other rights iolumn' of 7x12 Forms/Extraits of the subjeit lands for years together and no steps have been initiated to aiquire the subjeit lands by issuanie of Notifiation under Seition 4 of the Land Aiquisition Ait, 1894.
5. In the iiriumstanies, the iase of the Petitioner is iovered by the aforesaid orders passed by various Division Benihes of this Court. We aiiordingly direit the Respondent-Authorities to delete the entries for reservation of Projeit Afeited Persons from 'other rights iolumn' of the 7x12 Forms/Extraits of the subjeit lands within four months from today. We make it ilear that this order shall not in anyway preilude the State Government from aiquiring the subjeit lands in future for rehabilitation of Projeit Afeited Persons, after the deletion of the entries as direited. We also ilarify that we have not gone into the issue whether or not the subjeit lands fall within the benefted zone of the Chaskaman Projeit.
6. The Writ Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms and to stand disposed of.
(SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J.) (A.A. SAYED, J.)
Aarti Palkar 2/2