← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/8626/2025disposed off

Atul Bansal v. Maharashtra State Farming Corporation Limited

2025-07-02Hon'Ble The Chief Justice , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sandeep V. Marne2 pages

JPP 9. WP 8626.2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8626 OF 2025 JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR JYOTI PRAKASH PAWAR Date: 2025.07.03 10:42:06 +0530 Atul Bansal ... Petitioner V/s.

Maharashtra State Farming Corporation Ltd. & Ors. ... Respondents _______________________________________ Mr. Manoj Kumar Mishra for the Petitioner Ms. Rachana Harpale i/b. Nitin P. Deshpande (through V.C.) for Respondent No.1 Mr. Jay Sanklecha, 'B' Panel Counsel for Respondent No.2 _______________________________________ CORAM : ALOK ARADHE, CJ. AND SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

DATE : 02 JULY 2025 P.C. :

1.

With consent of learned Counsel for the parties, heard finally. 2.

In this Writ Petition, the Petitioner, inter-alia, has assailed the validity of the order dated 29 April 2025, passed by the Maharashtra State Farming Corporation Ltd., by which the Joint Farming Agreement dated 21 November 2023 executed in favour of the Petitioner has been cancelled. During the course of hearing, the consensus is arrived at between the parties. 3.

On the basis of the consensus arrived at between the parties, we issue the following directions :- 1/2

JPP 9. WP 8626.2025.doc (i) The Petitioner shall be permitted to cut the sugarcane crop which is standing on the land in question.

(ii) The Petitioner shall hand over the possession to the Maharashtra State Farming Corporation on 1 December 2025. (iii) The Petitioner, in addition, shall pay the amount due under the Agreement, if any, to the Maharashtra State Farming Corporation in respect of his possession on the land in question,till 30 November 2025.

(iv) Needless to state that in case the Petitioner does not pay the amount due by him in respect of the land in question, it will be permissible for the Maharashtra State Farming Corporation to recover the amount from the Petitioner.

4.

Accordingly, Writ Petition is disposed of.

( SANDEEP V. MARNE, J. ) ( CHIEF JUSTICE ) 2/2