Bombay High Court
Bhagwatsingh Bindaprasad Khangar vs State Of Mah. Thru The Secy. & 6 Ors on 13 January, 2017
Author: Vasanti A. Naik
Bench: Vasanti A. Naik, V. M. Deshpande
1 wp1997.07.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.1997/2007
Bhagwatsingh s/o Bindaprasad Khangar,
aged Major, Occ. Business, r/o Plot No.1,
Rohankharwadi, Mankapur, Chindwara Road,
Nagpur. .....PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1. State of Maharashtra thr. Secretary,
Ministry of Public Works Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. Nagpur Improvement Trust, thr.
Assistant Director, Town Planning,
Station Road, Sadar, Nagpur.
3. Smt. Kamlabai Shamrao Rohankar,
aged major, Occ. Housewife,
r/o Plot No. 2 and 3, Rohankarwadi,
Mankapur, Chhindwara Raod, Nagpur.
4. Ismailbhai Topiwala
(Dead through LR)
Saifuddin s/o Ismailbhai Topiwada,
r/o Ganjakhet, Nagpur.
5. Raman Radhesham Siroya (Khandelwal)
aged about Major, Occ. Business,
r/o 44-B, Suryanagar, Nagpur.
6. Sonbaji Musale, aged major,
Occ. Business, r/o Trimurti Nagar,
Hingna Road, Nagpur.
7. Rambhau Musale, aged major,
Occ. Business, r/o 52, Bhagyashri
Apartment, Trimurti Nagar, Nagpur. ...RESPONDENTS
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S. Harode, Advocate for petitioner.
Shri K. L. Dharmadhikari, A.G.P. for respondent No.1.
Shri J. B. Kasat, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Shri A. M. Ghare, Advocate for respondent No.3.
Shri V. S. Dhobe, Advocate for respondent No.6 and 7.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2017 00:17:27 :::
2 wp1997.07.odt
CORAM:- SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND
V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED :-
JANUARY 13, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the layout map and the allotment of the alleged 40 ft. wide road plot in favour of the respondent nos. 3 to 7.
It appears, on hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the return filed on behalf of the Nagpur Improvement Trust, that there is no merit in the case of the petitioner that the Government land meant for the 40 ft. wide road is wrongly allotted in favour of a private party. Though, it is the case of the petitioner that the concerned land was acquired by the Nagpur Improvement Trust, no material is placed by the petitioner on record to show that the Nagpur Improvement Trust, is the owner of the concerned land. On the other hand, it is stated in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Nagpur Improvement Trust that the concerned land is a private land and the layout plan has been sanctioned in the year 1957. It appears from the affidavit-in-reply of the respondent no.1-Trust that the layout plan was revised due to the changed circumstances. It appears from the affidavit-in-reply that the layout is chalked out on the private land and there is an allotment of the land in the layout to private ::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2017 00:17:27 ::: 3 wp1997.07.odt parties. The statements made in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Nagpur Improvement Trust are not controverted by the petitioner by filing a rejoinder and the statements need to be accepted. Since, the land does not appear to be the land of the Government, we do not find that there was any need for the authorities to hold a public auction for the allotment of the land.
We also do not find any locus standi in the petitioner to challenge the action of the Nagpur Improvement Trust. If the land was earmarked for the 40 ft. wide road and if the public is likely to be affected by the same, a Public Interest Litigation could have been filed.
Since, we do not find any merit in the challenge of the petitioner, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs.
(V. M. Deshpande, J.) (Smt. Vasanti A. Naik, J.) kahale ::: Uploaded on - 19/01/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 20/01/2017 00:17:27 :::