SUDAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order passed by the Mamlatdar, Kallam on 3/1/2018, rejecting the petitioner's application (suit) for removal of impediment created by the respondent No.6 in the way. The petitioner had challenged the said order before the Sub-Divisional Officer (S.D.O.) and thereafter before the Additional Collector and then before the Divisional Commissioner as well. The petitioner has, however, been unsuccessful before all the authorities from Mamlatdar to the Additional Commissioner. He is, therefore, before this Court.

(2.) There is an agricultural land bearing Gut No.1, situated at village Moha, Taluka Kallam, District Osmanabad. The respondent No.6 is uncle of the petitioner. The land Gut No.1 is their ancestral property. The land came to be partitioned in equal share between the petitioner and the respondent No.6 in 2008. As such, both have 1 Hector and 4 R land in Gut No.1. There is a well, borewell and a cement water tank in the said land. Those have been kept in common. The petitioner is required to go to the well to switch on electric connection to run the electric pump for watering crops in the land of his share. The petitioner is, therefore, required to go along/ pass from the way that runs from in front of the house of the respondent No.6. The petitioner has been making use of the said way for long. The respondent No.6, however, blocked the said way with trumps of coconut tree. The petitioner, therefore, moved the application dtd. 27/5/2013 to the Mamlatdar with a view to redress his grievance. The Mamlatdar, Kallam, by her order dtd. 13/1/2015, allowed the application moved by the petitioner granting him a right of pathway. The respondent No.6 was restrained from obstructing the petitioner from making use of the pathway.

(3.) The respondent No.6 challenged the said order in appeal before the S.D.O. The S.D.O., vide his order dtd. 7/7/2015, allowed the appeal and set aside the Mamlatdar's order dtd. 13/1/2015. The petitioner thereafter moved the Additional Collector against the order passed by the S.D.O. on 7/7/2015. The Additional Collector allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the Mamlatdar with a direction to make spot inspection and decide the matter on merits. The Mamlatdar, vide his impugned order dtd. 3/1/2018, rejected the petitioner's application on the ground of availability of a suitable alternative way. The petitioner unsuccessfully challenged the said order, first before the S.D.O. and then before the Additional Commissioner and the Additional Commissioner as well.