Rikhabdas S/O Ghevarchand Mandlecha v. Siddharam Salimath

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONT. PETITION NO. 226 OF 2024 IN WP/6629/2022 RIKHABDAS S/O GHEVARCHAND MANDLECHA

VERSUS

SIDDHARAM SALIMATH ...

Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Rupeshkumar C. Bora AGP for Respondent/State: Mr. N. S. Tekale ...

CORAM :

NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

DATED : 19th JUNE 2025 ORDER:- 1.

By order dated 30.06.2022 passed in Writ Petition No. 6629 of 2002, the Collector, Ahmednagar was directed to remove the encroachments in Gut No. 6, situated at Takali Manur, Tal Pathardi, District Ahmednagar.

2.

Thereafter measurement of Gut No.6 was carried out and it was found to be admeasuring 43 R land. The record indicates that there were 36 encroachments in Gut No.6. The Collector has filed affidavit on 26.03.2024, stating that, initially from the said Gut number, eight encroachments were removed.

By order dated 27th March, 2024, this Court granted time to remove the remaining encroachments. The Collector has filed

(2) affidavit dated 2nd May 2025, categorically stating therein that, with the aid of Tahsildar Pathardi and other Government Officers, remaining 28 encroachments were successfully removed on 18.04.2025, by following due procedure of law. Compliance report, as directed by this Court was also placed on record and it was marked 'X' by this Court for identification.

3.

In paragraph No. 7 of the affidavit, a statement is made that "however, apart from those 36 encroachments in Gut No.6, certain religious places, School and one burial ground of Muslim community are situated in the said gut number, excluding these, all other encroachments are removed by the respondents." It is further stated that, excluding the above referred public places, the office of the deponent has removed all other encroachments in Gut No.6. As on today, no encroachment remained to be removed in Gut No.6. We accept the said statement.

4.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner disputes the fact of removal of encroachments, stating that there are still encroachments. 5.

Learned A.G.P. submits that, there may be encroachments on land belonging to the Gram Panchayat, but there are no encroachments on land Gut No.6.

(3) 6.

In the light of above, since the order of this Court is complied with, the Contempt Petition stands disposed of. (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ) JUDGE JUDGE YSK/