Mohan Dattatray Jadhav And Others v. Sanjay Ramanlal Shah And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 102 REVIEW APPLICATION (CIVIL) NO.213 OF 2022 IN WP/6503/2022 MOHAN DATTATRAY JADHAV AND OTHERS

VERSUS

SANJAY RAMANLAL SHAH AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Bagul D. S.

AGP for Respondents-State : Mr. S. G. Karlekar Senior Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 4 : Mr. R. S. Deshmukh a/w Mr. S. A. Jadhav i/b Mr. C. T. Jadhav ...

CORAM :

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND ARUN R. PEDNEKER, JJ.

DATE :

12th August, 2022 PER COURT :

1.

This Court had passed an order dated 12/07/2022 in Writ Petition No.6503 of 2022. Paragraph No.3 of the order which is sought to be reviewed, reads as under :- "3.

On instructions from respondent No.5, who is present in the Court, the learned A.G.P. submits, that there are certain encroachments, which have been noticed and by identifying the areas and magnitude of the encroachments, the Statutory Authorities would follow the due procedure laid down in law, and by issuing notices to the concerned individuals, and by affording them an opportunity of hearing, the endeavour would be made

RA 213-2022 to remove the encroachments, by 20/10/2022."

2.

The learned Advocate for the petitioners vehemently submits that because of the above directions, the petitioners are likely to be removed from their properties, highhandedly. They apprehend that they would suffer on account of the above directions. 3.

We are of the view that the above reproduced directions precisely take care of the rights of the parties and the authorities are already directed to follow the due procedure laid down in law, and after issuing notices to the concerned individuals, afford them opportunities of hearing as is permissible in law. 4.

We do not think there is anything in the order which could amount to causing any injustice to the petitioners. 5.

This review application, therefore, is rejected. ( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ) vjg/-.