S.J.KATHAWALLA,J. - (1.) By the above Writ Petition, the Petitioner interalia seeks the following relief : "(b) That by an appropriate writ, order or direction, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the letter dated 28.10.2020 issued by the Respondent No.2 Collector, Thane thereby refusing to grant prior approval u/s. 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 as well as the letter dated 5.10.2020 issued by the Respondent No.1 herein to the Respondent No.2 thereby intimating that prior approval u/s. 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 cannot be granted to the Petitioner and further be pleased to direct the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to grant its prior approval u/s. 36A of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 for disposing of his land bearing Survey No.46/2, admeasuring 12.1 Ares and Survey No.46/3, admeasuring 61.7 Ares, both situate at Mouje Valshind, Taluka Bhiwandi, District Thane."
(2.) By consent of the Parties, the above Petition is taken up for fnal hearing at the stage of admission.
(3.) The brief facts in the matter are set out hereunder : 3.1. According to the Petitioner, he and his other family members are tribals and owners of land bearing Survey No.46/2, admeasuring 12.1 Ares and Survey No.46/3, admeasuring 61.7 Ares, both situate at Mouje Valshind, Taluka Bhiwandi, District Thane ('the said Land'). 3.2. Since the Petitioner and his family members were in need of money, they were looking out for a purchaser who was desirous of purchasing the said Land. 3.3. Respondent No.6 - Vijendra Shamlal Sharma agreed to purchase the said Land of the Petitioner. 3.4. There is an embargo on the sale of land belonging to tribals, i.e. if a tribal wants to sell his land to a non-tribal, he is required to obtain permission (as specifed in Sections 36 and 36A of the Maharashtra Land revenue Code, 1966) from the Collector and/or the State Government. 3.5. On 14th July, 2014, the Petitioner made an Application to the Respondent No.2 - Collector, Thane for obtaining the necessary sanction. 3.6. After the said Application dated 14th July, 2014 was made by the Petitioner, the Respondent No.2 - Collector, forwarded the same to the concerned Tahsildar to carry out an enquiry and submit a report. The Tahsildar, Thane forwarded his Report to the Respondent No.2 - Collector on 29 th December, 2014. The Deputy Collector, Thane also forwarded his Report dated 1 st January, 2015 to the Respondent No.2 - Collector. 3.7. According to the Petitioner, inspite of receipt of the Reports as aforestated, the Respondent No.2 did not proceed further and kept the Application of the Petitioner, pending. On several occasions, the Petitioner and the representative of Respondent No.6 had visited the Ofce of the Respondent No.2 - Collector. However, no steps whatsoever were taken by the Respondent No.2 - Collector to expedite the decision on the Application of the Petitioner, and instead all along only evasive replies were given by the Ofce of the Respondent No.2 - Collector. 3.8. In the above circumstance, on 17th January, 2019, Respondent No.6- proposed purchaser, made an Application to the Respondent No.2 - Collector, pointing out that the land bearing Survey Nos.46/2 and 46/3 as regards which permission for sale was sought by the Petitioner, are shown under reservation by Respondent No.5 - Mumbai Metropolitan Regional Development Authority ('MMRDA'). The Respondent No.6 informed the Respondent No.2 - Collector, that since the said Land is under reservation, the Respondent No.6 is ready and willing to purchase the same on 'as is where is' basis and that in future, the Respondent No.6 - proposed purchaser, would make use of the said Land as may be permitted by the Respondent No.5. 3.9. Respondent No.2 - Collector thereafter forwarded his Report to Respondent No.4 - Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, Navi Mumbai on 12 th February, 2019. In the said recommendation, Respondent No.2 - Collector specifcally mentioned that the Respondent No.6 vide his Application dated 17 th January, 2019, had shown his readiness and willingness to purchase the said Land and put the same to such non-agricultural use which would be permitted by Respondent No.5. 3.10. Thereafter, Respondent No.4 - Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division, issued a letter to the Respondent No.2 - Collector stating therein that from his recommendation it was not clear for which particular non-agricultural purpose the said Land would be put to use and whether such user would be permissible. 3.11. Pursuant thereto, Respondent No.3 - Deputy Collector, Thane, issued a letter to the Petitioner and informed him that it was not clear as to for which non- agricultural purpose the said Land would be used and whether such user would be permissible. 3.12. According to the Petitioner, pursuant to the receipt of the Letter dated 16th May, 2019, Respondent No.6 personally met Respondent No.3 - Deputy Collector, Thane, on 3rd June, 2019 and informed him that since the said Land is shown under reservation, Respondent No.6 is ready and willing to purchase the said Land on 'as is where is' basis and would also make use of the said Land as may be permitted by Respondent No.5. Respondent No.6 also informed Respondent No.3, that on 17 th January, 2019 itself, the Respondent No.6 had made an Application and placed on record his readiness and willingness to purchase the said Land on 'as is where is' basis and to make use of the said Land as may be permitted by Respondent No.5. 3.13. According to the Petitioner, sometime in the frst week of October 2020, the Respondent No.6 was informed from the Ofce of the Respondent No.1 that since the said Land was under reservation for playground and that there was no access road, hence permission under Section 36A could not be granted. 3.14. Thereafter, the Petitioner received a Letter dated 28 th October, 2020 from Respondent No.2 - Collector which is impugned herein, whereunder the Petitioner was informed that the said Land is shown under reservation for playground vide Reservation No.PG-7, that there is no mention as to the purpose for which the said Land would be used; there is no access road available to the said Land; and as such permission under Section 36A of the said Code cannot be granted. 3.15. The above Letter dated 28th October, 2020 was addressed to the Petitioner by the Respondent No.2 - Collector, based on the Letter issued by Respondent No.1 - State of Maharashtra to Respondent No.2 - Collector, informing the Respondent No.2 - Collector that prior permission could not be granted for the very same reasons mentioned in the above Letter dated 28th October, 2020. 3.16. The Petitioner has therefore fled the above Writ Petition praying for the relief set out in paragraph 1 above. ;