LAWS(BOM)-2004-3-166

MOTIRAM BAPUNA WAGH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On March 11, 2004
MOTIRAM BAPUNA WAGH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RULE. Rule taken up for final hearing with the consent of the parties.

(2.) BY invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, this petition is filed against the order dated 2. 2. 2002 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Khamgaon. in M. R. C.-81 ceiling/62/2001-2002, mouza Warna, whereby the piece of agricultural land allotted to the petitioner was forfeited to the Government in view of the provisions of s. 29-A of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on holdings) Act, 1961 (for short the Ceiling Act ).

(3.) RELEVANT facts are as under : the petitioner is an ex-serviceman retired from the military in the year 1985. One Madhukarrao Deshpande had filed return under s. 12 of the ceiling Act which was registered as Ceiling Case No. 42/75-76 of village warna. The Surplus Land Determination Tribunal (for short S. L. D. T.) by the order dated 29. 8. 1978 declared 93 acres of land as surplus which was to be distributed to the applicants including the petitioner in accordance with the provisions of the Ceiling Act. The land bearings. No. 51/1 situated at Warna, admeasuring 6 acres 1 guntha was allotted to him. The original land-holder Madhukar filed appeal before the various authorities and, therefore, the possession was not given to the petitioner. Thereafter the matter was taken up again by the S. D. O. Khamgaon, who by his order daiecd 5. 3. 1984 reduced the surplus land to 79. 5 acres. Therefore, the S. L. D. T. directed the original land-holder to fill up the Form and thereafter the land which was allotted to the petitioner was changed bearing Survey No. 93/ 1 which was allotted on 2. 4. 1984. The land allotted to the petitioner was forfeited to the Government by the impugned order passed by the S. D. O. Khamgaon on the ground that the petitioner did not cultivate the land personally and kept it hallow. This order is under challenge in this petition.