Lahu Krishna Mahadik Through Poa Holder Ankush Lahu Mahadik v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary Dept. Of Revenue And ORS.

VPH

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No. 13450 OF 2016 Lahu Krishna Mahadik ...

Petitioner Vs.

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...

Respondents *** Ms. Preeti Walimbe i/b Bhushan Walimbe, for the Petitioner. Mr. P. G. Sawant, AGP for Respondent - State. *** CORAM : V. M. KANADE, & Ms. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, JJ.

DATE : DECEMBER 20, 2016 PC.

1.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner. By this petition, which is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner is seeking following reliefs: "(a) this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus o any other appropriate writ, direction in the nature of writ directing the Respondents to implement the provisions of the Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 and take steps against the offenders for glorification of Sati in village Hajarmachi, taluka Karad, 1 / 3

district Satara;

(b) this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ / order / directions in the nature of writ calling for records and proceedings of the notice dated 16.8.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 3, the Tahsildar, Karad and after examining the legality and propriety thereof, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the same;

(c) this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ / order / directions in the nature of writ calling for records and proceedings of the notice dated 12.8.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 3, the Tahsildar, Karad and after examining the legality and propriety thereof, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the same;

(d) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the present writ petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the effect, operation, implementation and execution of the Notice dated 16.8.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 3, Tahsildar, Karad and the Notice dated 12.8.2016 issued by the Respondent No. 3, the Tahsildar, 2 / 3

Karad;

(e) ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d) be granted;

(f) costs be provided for;

(g) pass, any other reliefs that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper be granted."

2.

So far as prayer clause (a) is concerned, in our view, such a direction to implement the provisions of the commission of the Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 cannot be issued. The Petitioner may exhaust any other alternate remedy, which may be available to him, as provided under the said Act. Secondly, so far as prayer clause (b) is concerned, the Tahsildar has issued notice to the Petitioner asking him to remain present for further hearing, which was to take place on 22.8.2016. Since, the Tahsildar has issued a show-cause notice, we are not inclined to interfere with the said proceeding, which has been initiated against the Petitioner. The Petitioner may satisfy the Tahsildar that Tahsildar does not have jurisdiction to issue notice under the said Act. All the contentions of the parties are kept open. Writ petition is therefore, disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Sd/- Sd/- [Ms. NUTAN D. SARDESSAI, J.] [V. M. KANADE, J.] Vinayak Halemath 3 / 3