DEVLAGAN SADLOO YADAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN both these petitions, the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, direction or order declaring the action of the respondents directing them to vacate from the land bearing S. No. 41 as illegal and contrary to law. A further prayer is made that action of proposed demolition and rehabilitation of the petitioners without demarcating boundary line between Survey No. 41 and 42a (Part) of village Poisar is bad in law, and ultra vires Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

(2.) IT was the case of the petitioners that they are in possession of land bearing Survey No. 41 (Part) of village Poisar since more than two decades. Their possession is thus legal, valid and in accordance with law. The land was assessed by revenue authorities and had never been forest. No action, therefore, could have been taken against the petitioners.

(3.) IT is the case of the petitioners that in pursuance of a judgment and order passed by this Court on 15th September, 2003 in Writ Petition No. 305 of 1995, a public notice was issued on 30th September, 2003 in respect of Survey No. 41 (Part) directing the persons occupying the property to deposit an amount of Rs. 7,000/- under the rehabilitation scheme. The petitioners replied the said notice by praying the respondents to demarcate the boundary between Survey Nos. 41 and 42-A of village Poisar. According to them, the judgment in Writ Petition No. 305 of 1995 would not apply to S. No. 41 and their possession is legal and valid. The claim of the petitioners can be established only after demarcation of boundary between Survey No. 41 and 42a of Village Poisar. The notice, in the circumstances, is unlawful and without authority of law.