Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 5]

Bombay High Court

Grampanchayat Vairag Through ... vs The Tahasildar Barshi And Ors on 5 July, 2022

Author: Shrikant D. Kulkarni

Bench: Prasanna B. Varale, Shrikant D. Kulkarni

                                                                    10-wp-4101-2017 & Ors..doc




                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                  CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4101 OF 2017

                     Vairag Nagarpanchayat Vairag through
                     Chief Officer Smt. Veena J. Patkar        ...Petitioner
                            V/s.
                     The Tahasildar Barshi and Ors.            ...Respondents

                                                 WITH
                                  CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 1148 OF 2019

                     Jayashri Yuvraj Deshmukh & Anr.           ...Petitioners
                            V/s.
                     State of Maharashtra and Ors.             ...Respondents

                                                 WITH
        Digitally
                                  CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 4562 OF 2017
        signed by
MAMTA   MAMTA
        AMAR KALE
AMAR
KALE
        Date:
        2022.07.07
        14:55:24
                     Anandlal Motilal Gandhi                   ...Petitioner
                           V/s.
        +0530




                     Dr. Yuvraj Maruti Deshmukh & Ors.         ...Respondents

                                                  ----

                     Mr. Sandeep Salunke, for the Petitioner in WP/4101/2017 and
                     for Respondent No.3 in WP/1148/2019 and Respondent No.3 in
                     WP/4562/2017.
                     Mr. M. V. Thorat, for the Petitioners in WP/1148/2019 and
                     Respondent No.5 in WP/4101/2017 and Respondent Nos.1 & 2
                     in WP/4562/2017.
                     Mr. Virendra V. Pethe, for the Petitioner in WP/4562/2017.
                     Mr. Anand Kulkarni, for the Respondent No.3 in WP/4101/2017
                     and Respondent No.4 in WP/4562/2017.
                     Mr. P. B. Gujar, for the Respondent No.6 in WP/4101/2017.
                     Ms. M. S. Bane, A.G.P. for the Respondent / State.
                                                     ----

                     Mamta Kale                                  page 1 of 4
                                                           10-wp-4101-2017 & Ors..doc




                      CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND
                              SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 5 JULY 2022 P.C. . Writ Petition No.4101/2017 was initially filed in this Court at the instance of Grampanchayat Vairag, Barshi, Solapur. The Village Development Officer and the said Grampanchayat was party Respondent in other writ petitions namely Writ Petition No.4562/2017 and Writ Petition No.1148/2019. Though the Petitioners are raising different grounds, an order passed by learned Lokayukta is the common subject matter in all these petitions.

2. It seems that post filing the petition by the Grampanchayat subsequently, the status of Grampanchayat was converted into Nagarpanchayat and accordingly the amendments were carried out in the respective petitions. In Writ Petition No.4101/2017, State Authorities namely the Tahasildar Barshi and Collector Solapur are party Respondent Nos.1 and 2. In Writ Petition No.4562/2017, Tahasildar Barshi is Respondent No.5 wherein Collector Solapur is Respondent No.7. In Writ Petition No.4562/2017 one of the officer of the State, Superintendent of Land Record, Solapur is party Respondent No.6. In Writ Petition No.1148/2019, Collector Solapur is Respondent No.2 and Tahasildar Barshi is Respondent No.5.

Mamta Kale page 2 of 4 10-wp-4101-2017 & Ors..doc

3. It seems that in none of the petitions any reply is filed on behalf of Respondent / State Authorities. It is also submitted before this Court that an affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of private party in the petition but the copy of reply is not received by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner in Writ Petition No.4101/2017 submits that initially power / vakilpatra was filed on behalf of then Grampanchayat Vairag and in view of subsequent development, the counsel be permitted to file his power / vakilpatra on behalf of Nagarpanchayat Vairag.

5. Thus, at the request of learned counsels, three weeks' time is granted to take appropriate steps namely for filing power / vakilpatra, for exchanging the affidavit-in-replies and for filing affidavit-in-reply on behalf of State Authorities, if these Authorities are desirous of filing their respective responses.

6. It seems that an affidavit-in-reply is filed on behalf of Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 4 through Mr. R. K. Shelake, Tahasildar Barshi on 10 June 2017 but in other petitions no reply is filed by the State, as such State may file reply in other petitions if desirous before next date.

Mamta Kale page 3 of 4 10-wp-4101-2017 & Ors..doc

7. List the petition on 26 July 2022 for further consideration. Interim order, if any, to continue till next date.




(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.)             (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)




Mamta Kale                                           page 4 of 4