Tatyasaheb Nanasaheb Kedar v. The State Of Maharashtra Thru Chief Secretary, Ministry Of Revenue And Forest And ORS

514.WP.9099.2022.doc UMESH SHRINIWAS MALANI

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION UMESH SHRINIWAS MALANI Date: 2022.08.02 10:51:43 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO. 9 OF 2022 Tatyasaheb Nanasaheb Kedar

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors

...Respondents

***  Mr. Shailesh Chavan i/by Mr. Milind Deshmukh, Advocate for the Petitioner.

 Ms. R. M. Shinde, AGP, for the Respondent - State. *** CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & KISHORE C. SANT, JJ.

DATE : JULY 28, 2022.

P. C. :

1.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that a very limited issue is raised in the petition and the grievance is that the petitioner and members in the family of petitioner are owner and possessor of certain agricultural land and non-agricultural land. It is further submitted that for various purposes the petitioner and his family members are in need of appropriate measurement of the land, therefore, petitioner approached the competent authority with a request for measurement of the land. However, in spite of the repeated requests, no heed is paid and the lands are not measured, though the petitioner is ready to comply with all necessary formalities including deposit of fees for measurement of his land. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in prayer (a) reference is Shrikant

514.WP.9099.2022.doc made to representation dated 09th November, 2021 and the copy of the same is placed on record at Exhibit "F" page no. 90. The representation is in very unhappy wording as the petitioners are not very conversant with the legal formalities. Learned Counsel further submitted that petitioner be permitted to file an appropriate and fresh representation to Respondent No. 3 - Deputy Director of Land Records, Pune within two weeks and Respondent No. 3 be further directed to decide the representation expeditiously. 3.

This being a limited grievance, in view of the submissions of learned Counsel for the petitioner. Accepting the statement of learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner would file a fresh representation to Respondent No. 3 within a period of two (02) weeks, the petition is disposed of with directions. The Respondent No. 3 is directed that in case if petitioner filed fresh representation within two (02) weeks from today, the representation be decided as expeditiously as possible and not later than twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of the representation by the authority. Needless to state that this Court has not gone into the merits of the representation. With these directions the writ petition is disposed of.

4.

All concerned shall act upon a copy of this order which is duly authenticated by the Registry of this Court.

(KISHORE C. SANT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) Shrikant