Bombay High Court
Nanasaheb Abasaheb Kharad And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 5 April, 2024
1 901-WP-3631-24.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 3631 OF 2024
NANASAHEB ABASAHEB KHARAD AND ANOTHER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH COLLECTOR
AHMEDNAGAR AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Adinath B. Jagtap
AGP for Respondents No.1 to 5 : Mr. S. N. Kendre
...
CORAM : S. G. MEHARE, J.
DATE : 05-04-2024 PER COURT :-
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.
2. Issue notice to respondents, returnable on 29.04.2024.
3. Learned A.G.P. waives service of notice for respondents No.1 to 5.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that petitioners and respondents No.6 and 7 have compromised in Rasta Case No.29 of 2022. Respondent No.4/Tahsildar passed an order on 14.10.2022. He also submits that another Rasta Case No.23 of 2022 was filed by Kisan Namdev Jadhav against respondent No.6. In that case, respondent No.6 had agreed to give a road to the beneficiary of the petitioner. In that case also, a compromise arrived at between the parties. However, respondent No.6 has preferred revision against the order passed in Rasta Case No.23 of 2022.
2 901-WP-3631-24.odt
5. Hence, the petitioners have also preferred a revision against the order passed in Rasta Case No.29 of 2022.
6. He submits that the Sub-Divisional Officer ought to have decided both revisions together. He decided the revision filed by the respondents only. Now, the Tahsildar has issued execution notice, dated 02.04.2024 which is received by the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is incomplete execution of the said order. If the impugned order is executed, the petitioners would not get the benefits arising out of the settlement between the parties. Therefore, till revision is preferred by respondent no.6 against the order passed in Rasta Case No.23 of 2022, the execution of impugned judgment and order be stayed.
7. Considering the facts, it appears that the dispute about road was settled. However, the Tahsildar did not pass the common judgment in both Rasta Cases and that created a mess. The petitioners are still ready to comply with the order passed in Rasta Case No.29 of 2023.
8. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be interim stay to the execution and implementation of the order of Tahsildar, Shevgaon, dated 14.10.2024, passed in Vahivat Case No.29 of 2023, till the next date.
( S. G. MEHARE ) JUDGE rrd