Shri. Hemraj Warlu Ghate And Another v. The State Of Maha. Thr. Its Collector And Others
2025:BHC-NAG:12497-DB 1 102wp365.2025..doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, AT NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 365 OF 2025 (Shri Hemraj Warlu Ghate and anr Vs.The State of Maharashtra and others ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms. Sanjana Raut, Advocate for petitioners.
Mr. S.Y. Deopujari, Advocate for respondent No.4. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR & RAJNISH R. VYAS,JJ. DATED : 17-11-2025.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners. According to her, though she was entitled for two independent plots, she was allowed only one plot admeasuring 3500 Sq.Ft.
2.
We have gone through the record, more particularly, joint application preferred by petitioners which is at page 90. If said application is perused, it would be crystal clear that prayer to allow two plots was signed by co-applicants. Now, the contention of the petitioner that each brother be separately granted plot cannot be considered, in view of application moved. Further, learned Counsel for respondent has brought to our notice policy of the Government which clearly shows that project affected family would get 3,000 SqFt plot who holds the agricultural land whereas, a person who is not agriculturist, would be entitled to get 1500 Sq.Ft., If the family is joint family, then further 500 SqFt would be allotted to him. 3.
In the instant case, rightly 3000 Sq.Ft. plus 500 Sq.Ft. plot has been allotted to the petitioner. Considering the policy of the Government, we do not find that action taken by the respondent authorities is illegal, therefore, the petition is dismissed. (RAJNISH R. VYAS, J) (ANIL S. KILOR, J) Belkhede, PS