Shri Kashinath Ramchandra Kadu And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra And ANR
1 WP 3284-15.doc-21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3284 OF 2015 Shri Kashinath Ramchandra Kadu & Ors.
] ... Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
] ... Respondents Dr. Milind Sathe, Senior Advocate a/w Ms. Monisha Mane & Ms. Pooja Tated i/b ANB Partners for Petitioners. Mr. P. P. Kakade, AGP for State - Respondents. CORAM :- DR. MANJULA CHELLUR, C.J., & G. S. KULKARNI, J.
DATE :- 1 MARCH, 2017 P. C. :- 1.
The petitioners are before this Court aggrieved by the fact that the entire mutation pertaining to Survey Nos.26/4 and 58/5 which are now converted as Gat numbers admeasuring 3 Acres 31 Gunthas and 1 Acre 21 Gunthas respectively, is entered in the name of PWD though acquisition was only to an extent of 1 Acre 12 Gunthas and 1 Guntha respectively in the above-said Survey numbers. 2.
It is also brought on record that at the time of acquisition of these lands, the lands had Survey numbers and as on today, the lands are converted to Gat numbers and even the measurement of Acres is in Hectares. It is the case of the petitioners that the Gat
2 WP 3284-15.doc-21 numbers now referred in the affidavit-in-reply filed by the respondents - authority, Gat No.72 is in respect of Survey No.26/4 and Gat No.114 is in respect of Survey No.58/5. According to the learned Counsel petitioners, these two Gat numbers pertain to lands which were not acquired but the balance land after acquiring 1 Acre 12 Gunthas and 1 Guntha from Survey Nos.26/4 and 58/5. He also refers to the letter dated 30/12/2014 addressed by the Tahasildar, at page 110 of the petition, to contend that the Tahasildar made it clear that the Gat numbers now referred to are the Gat numbers pertaining to balance land after acquisition, out of Survey Nos.26/4 and 58/5. 3.
According to the learned Counsel for petitioners, after acquiring a portion of land from the above two Survey numbers, balance land was left with the petitioners and therefore, entire mutation cannot be in the name of PWD. Therefore, the petitioners are before this Court. On perusal of affidavit, it indicates altogether different meaning. It would rather mean that the Survey numbers which were acquired being present Gat Nos.72 and 114. In other words, the affidavit-in-reply is not too happily worded. On the other hand, at Exh.N at page 110 of the writ petition, the Tahasildar clearly indicates otherwise.
4.
Under these circumstances, we direct the respondents - authorities to treat the petition as a representation of the petitioners and rectify the mistakes, if any, as contended by the petitioners, after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned.
3 WP 3284-15.doc-21 5.
The parties must clarify what was the Gat number of acquired lands and what is the Gat number of un-acquired lands, if the above to Survey numbers were measuring more than the lands acquired.
6.
The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 7.
All contentions of all parties are kept open. (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)