Yuvraj S/O. Mahadeo Borker And Others v. State Of Maharashtra Thr. Collector Collectorate Office Chandrapur And Others

21.06.wp.3418.16

IN THE COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3418/2016 (Shri Yuvraj s/o Mahadeo Borkar and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others ) .............................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders .............................................................................................................................................. Mr. O.K. Masurke, Advocate for the petitioners Ms.N.P. Mehta, Assistant Govt. Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A.NAIK & MRS.SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.

DATED : 21st June, 2016 Heard.

By this Writ Petition, the petitioners challenge the communication of the respondent no. 2-Executive Officer, Chandrapur Irrigation Department, Chandrapur, proposing to decrease the height of the wall of Mangrool Talao, by 30 cms. According to the petitioners, the respondent no.2 does not have any right to do so.

It is the case of the petitioners that some villagers from village Kitali have encroached upon the land near the Mangrool Talao and have illegally sought the reduction in the height of the wall of the Talao, by 30 cms. It is the case of the petitioners that by illegally upholding the objection raised on behalf of several villagers, the respondent no.2 has recommended the reduction of the height of the wall of the Talao, considerably.

21.06.wp.3418.16 It is stated that the petitioners are agriculturists and take water from the Talao, for the purpose of irrigation. It is stated that the decrease in the wall of the Talao would result in great hardship to the petitioners and some other villagers.

We are not inclined to issue the directions against the respondents, as sought by the petitioners in the instant petition. It appears that several disputed questions of facts would arise for determination in this Writ Petition. Several villagers are seeking reduction of the height of the wall as a safety measure. The petitioners are objecting to the reduction in the height of the wall as they are drawing water from the Talao. If the petitioners are aggrieved by the action on the part of other villagers as well as the respondent no.2, the petitioners are free to avail appropriate remedy. The issues involved in this Writ Petition cannot be decided in exercise of the writ jurisdiction We dismiss the Writ Petition, with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE sahare