SHIVSHANKAR SHIVRAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is one more in the series of matters where jurisdiction of this court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is invoked not by rightful owners but builders and developers, to reclaim the vacant lands in excess of ceiling limits, which have already vested in the State. The surplus land holders and owners of these lands very well know that their fate is sealed for they are divested of their right, title and interest in these lands by due process of law. However, they are propped up by builders and developers with ulterior motives to file such petitions by relying on the repeal of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (Principal Act) in the State of Maharashtra with effect from 29th November, 2007. Though physical possession of these lands is with the State and not challenged by the owners and surplus vacant land holders at the relevant time, now they raise such challenge being financed by builders and developers. Builders and developers and particularly those amongst them who have no locus and right in law raise a challenge on the strength of irrevocable power of attorneys from the erstwhile owners. They put forward pleas which their principals have never raised. Such litigants are encouraged sometimes by inaction of the State officials in maintaining and preserving proper records and sometimes the State machinery deliberately assists them by keeping back crucial and important documents. Whatever may be the cause, this court's precious time is wasted in not only scrutinising the original records, but in considering the prolonged arguments. All this because even one square feet of land is extremely valuable in a city like Mumbai and commands a huge price in the market. In cases after cases, vacant lands and which have not been fenced and protected are subject matter of such litigations and since the State is unaware about the extent of the land it owns, there is a tendency of filing them. This is one more case where builders and developers are before the court after the surplus land holders and owners have accepted the correctness and validity of the State's action. As Judges we hardly have any choice particularly when such petitions are admitted.

(2.) This petition was extensively heard by us and on several occasions. On 28th January, 2016, we passed the following order: -

(3.) Thereafter, on 17th February, 2016, the parties concluded their arguments and we closed the matter for judgment.