GAJANAN KAMLYA PATIL Vs. ADDL. COLLECTOR & COMP. AUTH.
LAWS(SC)-2014-2-22
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on
February 14,2014
Gajanan Kamlya Patil
Appellant
VERSUS
Addl. Collector And Comp. Auth.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
MAHARAJ SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]RAJENDRA KUMAR VS. KALYAN [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF UP V. HARI RAM [REFERRED TO]
Cited Judgements :-
TELANGANA STATE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTUCTURE VS. Y.CHANDRASEKHARA CHOWDARY [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-3-18] [REFERRED TO]THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU VS. AALIM MUHAMMED SALEGH TRUST [LAWS(MAD)-2014-12-17] [REFERRED TO]
AMBALAL BHAVANBHAI PATEL VS. COMPETENT AUTHORITY & ADDL COLLECTOR & 1 ANR [LAWS(GJH)-2014-10-111] [REFERRED TO]
LAL SINGH VS. COMPETENT AUTHORITY URBAN LAND CEILING AND REGULATION [LAWS(ALL)-2023-1-69] [REFERRED TO]
RIYASAT KHAN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-3-117] [REFERRED TO]
NARENDRA KUMAR VS. STATE OF U P & ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2015-10-294] [REFERRED]
VEER NARAYAN RATHORE VS. STATE OF M.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2015-10-53] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVSHANKAR SHIVRAM SINGH VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2016-5-88] [REFERRED TO]
G. SIVA SANKAR REDDY VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2023-10-48] [REFERRED TO]
HEIRS OF K G TRIPATHI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-5-57] [REFERRED TO]
JHUTHARAM AND ORS. VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2015-10-21] [REFERRED TO]
GOPI RAM VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-10-29] [REFERRED TO]
BASANT LAL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2014-10-114] [REFERRED TO]
BHAGAWATI PRASAD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-348] [REFERRED]
KANHIYA LAL YADAV @ KANDHAI LAL @ KANHAI AND 2 OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P AND 4 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-5-639] [REFERRED TO]
TAHSILDAR VS. A.P. ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION [LAWS(TLNG)-2023-2-147] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA PRASAD D TRIPATHI AND ORS VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-5-68] [REFERRED TO]
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER URBAN LAND CEILING VS. K.VANNIMUTHU [LAWS(MAD)-2021-9-31] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY NARAIN & ORS VS. STATE OF U P CEILING DEPT & ORS [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-349] [REFERRED]
STATE OF U.P. VS. BALBIR SINGH AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-9-242] [REFERRED TO]
KAILASH PRASAD TEWARI VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2023-2-19] [REFERRED TO]
SRI RAJENDRA AGARWAL AND OTHERS VS. THE STATE OF TELANGANA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, HYDERABAD AND OTHERS. [LAWS(APH)-2016-10-39] [REFERRED TO]
MADHUBINDU JAYSHANKER VYAS VS. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER [LAWS(GJH)-2017-8-113] [REFERRED TO]
SAVITRI SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-7-405] [REFERRED TO]
JAGANNATH VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-174] [REFERRED TO]
ISRAR HASAN KHAN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-459] [REFERRED]
MUNNU LAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-356] [REFERRED]
VEER NAGAR SAHAKARI AWAS SAMITI LTD. AGRA VS. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2016-4-239] [REFERRED]
MALLIKINISHA VS. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (ULT); SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE; COMMISSIONER (ULC), LAND REFORMS [LAWS(MAD)-2014-7-336] [REFERRED]
K. RAMAKRISHNA RAO VS. THE GOVERNMENT OF A.P., REVENUE (UC.I) DEPARTMENT AND ORS. [LAWS(APH)-2015-2-70] [REFERRED TO]
J. SARADA GOVARDHINI VS. THE SPECIAL OFFICER AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(APH)-2017-7-20] [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY WIRE ROPES LIMITED VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2019-2-59] [REFERRED TO]
RAKESH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-9-520] [REFERRED TO]
MANILAL DAMODAR JOSHI SINCE DECD THRO LEGAL HEIRS VS. STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 [LAWS(GJH)-2018-5-11] [REFERRED TO]
GUDDI VS. STATE OF U P THR, PRIN SECY DEPTT OF URBAN LAND CE [LAWS(ALL)-2018-3-382] [REFERRED TO]
YAMDULLAH KHAN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-3-116] [REFERRED TO]
A.P. ELECTICAL EQUIPMENT CORPORATION VS. THASILDAR, BALANAGAR MANDAL [LAWS(TLNG)-2022-1-84] [REFERRED TO]
PAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-11-103] [REFERRED TO]
SUBHASH CHANDRA VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-124] [REFERRED TO]
GAYUR VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2019-8-214] [REFERRED TO]
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER VS. G.D.VAITHIYALINGAM [LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-76] [REFERRED TO]
HIRABHAI GANESHBHAI SOLANKI VS. COMPETENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(GJH)-2014-4-108] [REFERRED TO]
T.RAJENDRAN VS. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-756] [REFERRED TO]
BACHCHAN MIAN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2015-7-458] [REFERRED]
PHUL CHANDRA VS. STATE OF U P & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-357] [REFERRED]
MOHAMMADUNISHA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
BABUBAI MAFATBHAI PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2017-3-293] [REFERRED TO]
RAKSHA R ACHARYA VS. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER & COMPETENT AUTHORITY [LAWS(KAR)-2018-9-296] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. M.S. VISWANATHAN [LAWS(SC)-2021-9-75] [REFERRED TO]
KAPILABEN AMBALAL PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(SC)-2020-5-32] [REFERRED TO]
P. LAXMI KANTHA RAO VS. GOVERNMENT OF A.P. [LAWS(APH)-2014-12-130] [REFERRED TO]
GAUTAMPRASAD K TRIPATHI AND ORS VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2014-5-84] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL MAHENDRABHAI BHAILALBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2017-6-234] [REFERRED TO]
MIRZA AMEER ULLAH BEG AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-11-122] [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)We are, in these appeals, concerned with the question whether the High Court was justified in relegating the parties to file Civil Suits to recover the lands covered by Survey No.54/4 and Survey No.53/3, both admeasuring 1870 sq. meters, situated at Village Kasarwadavli, Ghodbunder Road, Taluka and Distt. Thane, so as to get the benefit of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999.
(3.)We may, for the disposal of these appeals, refer to the facts in Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No.14690 of 2011, treating the same as the leading case. The Appellant herein was issued a notice dated 17.2.2005 under Section 10(5) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'ULC Act') for taking possession of the Appellant's land bearing Survey Nos.47/10 and 54/4. It was stated in the notice that in accordance with the notification published in Part-I, Page No. Konkan Division Supplementary, dated 12.12.2002, in the Gazette of Maharashtra, the land notified had been vested in the Government of Maharashtra and that Additional Collector and Competent Authority, Thane (for short "Competent Authority"), had been authorized by the State Government to take possession of the land in question, details of which had been published in the notification under Section 10(3) and the land be handed over or possession be given within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice. Further, it was also intimated that if the Appellant had failed to give possession of the land, necessary action would be taken for taking possession by application of necessary force.
(2.)We are, in these appeals, concerned with the question whether the High Court was justified in relegating the parties to file Civil Suits to recover the lands covered by Survey No.54/4 and Survey No.53/3, both admeasuring 1870 sq. meters, situated at Village Kasarwadavli, Ghodbunder Road, Taluka and Distt. Thane, so as to get the benefit of Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999.
(3.)We may, for the disposal of these appeals, refer to the facts in Civil Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition No.14690 of 2011, treating the same as the leading case. The Appellant herein was issued a notice dated 17.2.2005 under Section 10(5) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976 (for short 'ULC Act') for taking possession of the Appellant's land bearing Survey Nos.47/10 and 54/4. It was stated in the notice that in accordance with the notification published in Part-I, Page No. Konkan Division Supplementary, dated 12.12.2002, in the Gazette of Maharashtra, the land notified had been vested in the Government of Maharashtra and that Additional Collector and Competent Authority, Thane (for short "Competent Authority"), had been authorized by the State Government to take possession of the land in question, details of which had been published in the notification under Section 10(3) and the land be handed over or possession be given within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice. Further, it was also intimated that if the Appellant had failed to give possession of the land, necessary action would be taken for taking possession by application of necessary force.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.