R A JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The limited question raised in this petition is whether the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal was right in rejecting the claim of the petitioner that he should be permitted to have survey Nos. 78, 79, 31/B-2 delimited as surplus land.

(2.) The Surplus Land Determination Tribunal found that the petitioner held surplus land to the extent of 30 acres 19 gunthas. The Surplus Land Determination Tribunal delimited Survey No. 62 and 6/A totalling 30 acres and 19 gunthas from Survey No. 79 which had an area of 15 acres 19 gunthas as surplus land. One of the contentions raised in the appeal before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal and which indeed appears to be the only contention seriously pressed before the Revenue Tribunal was that he was not given adequate opportunity to exercise his choice of retention. In the appeal, he offered survey Nos. 78, 79 and a part of 31/B-2 as surplus land. The Revenue Tribunal, however, held that the grievance that the choice was not permitted to be given was without substance, but it further took the view that the fields which the petitioner wanted to offer before the Revenue Tribunal stood in the name of the petitioners son Nagnath and were also in his possession. The Tribunal therefore, rejected the choice on the ground that the fields do not stand in the name of the petitioner. This petition is now filed by the petitioner challenging this decision of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal.

(3.) The only contention raised in this petition by Mr. Bhadekar on behalf of the petitioner is that the Tribunal was not justified in law in rejecting the contention of the petitioner with regard to the choice of land to be retained and delimited as surplus land.