Vimalbai Ashokchand Kankariya v. State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CONTEMPT PETITION NO.265 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO.2307 OF 2013 Vimalbai w/o Ashokchand Kankariya, Age: Major, Occu: Household & Agri., R/o Patoda, Tq. Patoda, Dist. Beed ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary Revenue and Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2.

Navalkishor Ram, The Collector, Beed, Tq. & Dist. Beed 3.

The Superintendent of Land Records, Beed 4.

Manik Keshavrao Mundhe, The Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Patoda. At present office of Superintendent of Land Record, Ahmednagar, Dist. Ahmednagar 5.

Vikram Deshmukh, The Tahasildar, Patoda, Tq. Patoda, Dist. Beed 6.

A. S. Dahiphade, Deputy Superintendent of Land Record, Patoda, Tq. Patoda, Dist. Beed ..RESPONDENTS Mr N. L. Jadhav, Advocate for petitioner;

Mr P. G. Borade, A.G.P. for respondents/State

(2) CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND R. G. AVACHAT, JJ.

DATE : 4th July, 2019 ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr Jadhav, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader appearing for respondents/State.

2.

Learned Asstt. Govt. Pleader, by inviting our attention to affidavit-in-reply filed by one Mr Astik Kumar Pandey, who is occupying the position of the District Collector, Beed, submitted that there is compliance of the order of this Court in letter and spirit. Our attention is invited to para Nos.4, 5 and 6 of the said affidavit-in-reply. The letter issued through the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Patoda, dated 1st July, 2019 is also annexed to affidavit-in-reply along with the copy of the measurement reflected in the measurement map. 3.

Mr Jadhav, learned Counsel for the petitioner also fairly admits that the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Collector, Beed shows the compliance of the order of this Court.

(3) 4.

As the purpose of approaching to this Court by filing contempt petition is duly served and the petitioner, if is having any grievance in respect of measurement, he is at liberty to raise the grievance before the appropriate and competent authority, if so advised. With this liberty to the petitioner, the petition is disposed of accordingly. (R. G. AVACHAT, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk