Chandrabhan Ganpati Londhe And ORS v. State Of Maha And ORS
{1}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.3536 OF 2008 IN LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.8 OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2086 OF 1988 Chandrabhan s/o Ganpati Londhe and others Applicants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.Jain, advocate holding for Mrs.A.S. Rasal, advocate for applicants.
Mrs.V.A.Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.
Mrs.M.A.Kulkarni, advocate for Respondents No.3 to 5. CORAM : R.M.BORDE & SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 12th February, 2015 PER COURT:
The applicants are praying for recalling the order passed by this Court on 28.02.2008 dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution.
Heard. For the reasons stated in the application, application deserves to be allowed and same is accordingly allowed. The order passed by this Court on 28.02.2008 dismissing the appeal for want of prosecution is recalled and the appeal is restored to its original number.
Civil Application is disposed of.
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE adb/ca353608
{2}
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.8 OF 2004 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2086 OF 1988 Chandrabhan s/o Ganpati Londhe and others Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.Jain, advocate holding for Mrs.A.S. Rasal, advocate for appellants.
Mrs.V.A.Shinde, A.G.P. for Respondent No.1.
Mrs.M.A.Kulkarni, advocate for Respondents No.3 to 5. CORAM : R.M.BORDE & SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 12th February, 2015 PER COURT:
The appellants claim to be in possession over the service inam land governed by the Hyderabad Atiyat Inquiries Act, 1952. The appellants claim their possession on the basis of lease deed allegedly executed by the Inamdar for the period of 98 years. Pursuance to the complaint presented by Respondent No.2, inquiry was initiated by the Deputy Collector, Atiyat, in respect of Atiyat property and after noticing that the Inamdar is not looking after the property in proper manner, the Deputy Collector issued directions that the property be taken under Government supervision and same shall be allotted on lease basis for the period of one year ( 'ek saal laoni' basis).
The order passed by the Deputy Collector, Atiyat, was
{3} objected by the appellants by presenting Writ Petition No.2086 of 1998, which came to be dismissed by the learned Single Judge, by order dated 5th November, 2003. The learned Single Judge, while dismissing the writ petition, has observed that there is a specific prohibition under the Hyderabad Atiyat Inquiries Act, 1952, in respect of creation of third party interest over the Atiyat properties governed by the Hyderabad Atiyat Inquiries Act, 1952. It is not disputed that the agricultural land is a service inam granted in favour of the Inamdar. The appellants claim entitlement through the Inamdar. Although it is contended that they are put in possession on the basis of lease deed executed by the Inamdar for the period of 98 years, the lease document is not forthcoming.
Apart from this, under the provisions of Hyderabad Atiyat Inquiries Act, 1952, the appellants cannot claim any entitlement in respect of service inam lands. The view taken by the learned Single Judge, while dismissing the writ petition, cannot be termed as erroneous or perverse. Letters Patent Appeal is devoid of substance.
Hence, Letters Patent Appeal stands dismissed. Pending Civil Application, if any, stands dismissed. SUNIL P. DESHMUKH R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE adb/ca353608