Subhash Sevakram Khanwani v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors
Case Details
2025:BHC-AUG:8706 WP-5564-2022.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5564 OF 2022 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11842 OF 2024 IN WP/5564/2022 Subhash Sevakram Khanwani ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors ...Respondents • Mr. A. N. Nagargoje, Advocate for the Petitioner • Mr. S. B. Jadhav, AGP for the Respondents/State • Mr. S. P. Shah, Advocate for the Respondent No.3 *** *** CORAM : R. M. JOSHI, J DATE : MARCH 10, 2025 PER COURT : 1. This Petition takes exception to the order dated 17.05.2022 passed by the Tahsildar, Nandurbar below Exh. 8 whereby the Tahsildar has held that the order of stay granted by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2312/2000 stood automatically vacated and further directed the Authorities to take action in respect of the subject matter of the said Petition. 2. It is the case of the Petitioner that Mohanlal Budhrani filed application for execution of the order passed in LND.A. 15/1997 passed by the Additional Umesh PAGE 1 OF 7 WP-5564-2022.odt Commissioner, Nashik. In response to the said letter dated 21.12.2019 filed by Respondent No. 3, Additional Commissioner issued direction to conduct investigation and forward report to the said office. Petitioner responded to the said application by contending that the dispute is between the Petitioner and one Ishwarlal Khanwani and Respondent No. 3 has no locus standi to file any application and to seek execution of the order. This matter was placed for hearing and parties also filed their written notes of arguments. On 17.05.2022, Tahsildar came to the conclusion that the
Legal Reasoning
Petitioner had challenged the order of Additional Commissioner, Nashik in the High Court and there is no stay to the said proceedings and passed order proceedings further for execution of the order of Additional Commissioner. Being aggrieved by the said order, present Petition is filed. 3. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has drawn attention of the Court to the fact that in Writ Petition No. 2312/2020, there is a stay granted by this Court to the order passed by the Additional Commissioner. This order came to be challenged before Umesh PAGE 2 OF 7 WP-5564-2022.odt the Hon’ble Supreme Court unsuccessfully. It is his contention that rule has been issued and the said Petition is at the stage of final hearing. It is his submission that directions issued by the Supreme Court in case of Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2018) 16 SCC 299, are overruled by the Constitution Bench in case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. and Ors., AIROnline 2024 SC 143. It is his submission that reference made to the Government Resolution by the Tahsildar is wholly misplaced. 4.
Legal Reasoning
Learned Counsel for the contesting Respondent supported the impugned order with contention that at the relevant time, in view of the judgment in case of Asian Resurfacing (supra), it was obligatory on the part of the Tahsildar to proceed with the matter if there was no extension of the interim relief granted by the Court beyond period of six months. In order to support his submission that the Tahsildar was not required to call upon the party to approach the High Court for extension of time in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of High Court Bar Umesh PAGE 3 OF 7 WP-5564-2022.odt Association, Allahabad (supra). 5. No doubt, Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Asian Resurfacing (supra) has issued directions that all civil and criminal cases where the proceedings are held up on account of stay, such stay would stand automatically vacated on expiry of period of six months unless in an exceptional case by speaking order such stay is extended. The Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad (supra), however, has overruled the said judgment and it is held that merely on account of pendency if the proceedings are not taken up for hearing for a long time, the stay granted by the High Court shall stand vacated automatically. 6. Here in this case, Tahsildar has sought to rely upon the Government Resolution dated 06.05.2021. The said resolution reads thus: lanHkZ%& ’kklu ifji=d dzekad vkjbZOgh&1093@354@iz-dz- 4@y&2] fnukad 24 vkWxLV] 1993 ’kklu ifji=d& ek- loksZPp U;k;ky;kus MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1577 CF 2020 in CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1375-76 OF 2013 ;k Umesh PAGE 4 OF 7 WP-5564-2022.odt izdj.kkr fn- 15 vkWDVkscj] 2020 P;k vkns’kkUo;s vls vknsf’kr dsys vkgs dh] Þdks.kR;kgh U;k;ky;kus Civil/Criminal case e/;s fnysyh varfje Lfkfxrhps dkye;kZnk Qdr 6 efgU;kai;Zr jkghy- ek- U;k;ky;kus lcG iqjkO;kP;k vk/kkjs v’kh LFkfxrh 6 efgU;kuarj ok<foyh vlsy rjp fnysyh Lfkfxrh pkyw jkghy] vU;Fkk lnjgw Lfkfxrh 6 efgU;kpk dkyko/kh laiY;kuarj vkiksvki O;ixr gksbZy- rlsp] gs vknks’k laiw.kZ ns’kkP;k dks.kR;kgh ek- U;k;ky;kus fnysY;k loZ Lfkfxrh vkns’kkyk ykxw jkgrhyß] vlsgh lnj vkns’ke/;s uewn dsys vkgs- egkjk"Vª tehu eglwy lafgrk] 1966 e/khy rjrwnhuqlkj vFkok tehufo"k;d fofo/k vf/kfu;ekaUo;s ek- ea=h ¼eglwy½] ek- jkT;ea=h ¼eglwy½] iz/kku lfpo ¼v-o-fj-½] {ks=h; eglwyh vf/kdkjh o izkf/kdkjh] vkf.k egkjk"Vª eglqy U;k;kf/kdj.k ;kaP;k leksj osGksosGh v/kZ&U;kf;d izdj.kkaph lquko.kh vk;ksftr dj.;kr ;srs- ;k ckch fopkjkr ?ksowu eglwyh vf/kdkjh o izkf/kdkjh ;kaP;k leksj tehu fo"k;d vf/kdu;ek[kkyh pky.kk&;k v/kZ&U;kf;d izdj.kkaP;k lanHkkZrhy Lfkfxrh vkns’kkP;k ckcrhr eglwyh vf/kdkjy o izkf/kdkjh ;kauk fn’kkfunsZ’k ns.;kph ckc ’kklukP;k fopkj/khu gksrh- ek- loksZPp U;k;ky;kus MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1577 CF 2020 in CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1375-76 OF 2013 ;k izdj.kkr fn- 15 vkWDVkscj] 2020 jksth ikfjr dsysY;k vkns’kkP;k ¼vkns’kkph izr ;klkscr tksMyh vkgs½ vuq"kaxkus] ek- ea=h ¼eglwy½] ek- jkT;ea=h ¼eglwy½] iz/kku lfpo ¼v-o-fj-½] {ks=h; eglwyh vf/kdkjh o izkf/kdkjh] vkf.k egkjk"Vª eglqy U;k;kf/kdj.k ;kaP;k leksj pky.kk&;k v/kZ&U;kf;d@U;kf;d izdj.kkaP;k ckcrhr loZ lacaf/kr eglwyh vf/kdkjh o izkf/kdkjh ;kauk ;kn~okjs iq<hyize.ks fn’kk funsZ’k ns.;kr ;sr vkgsr%& ek- ea=h ¼eglwy½] ek- jkT;ea=h ¼eglwy½] iz/kku ¼1½ lfpo ¼v-o-fj-½] {ks=h; eglwyh vf/kdkjh o izkf/kdkjh] vkf.k egkjk"Vª eglqy U;k;kf/kdj.k ;kaP;k leksj pky.kk&;k (Quasi-Judicial)@U;kf;d izdj.kh 6 v/kZ&U;kf;d efgU;kais{kk tkLr dkGkdjhrk Lfkfxrh fnysY;k loZ izdj.kh ek- loksZPp U;k;ky;kus MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 1577 CF 2020 in CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1375-76 OF 2013 ;k izdj.kkr fn- 15 vkWDVkscj] 2020 jksth fnysY;k vkns’kkizek.ks] loZ lacaf/krkauh ;ksX; rh dk;Zokgh djkoh Umesh PAGE 5 OF 7 WP-5564-2022.odt dks.kR;kgh ifjfLFkrhr ek- loksZPp U;k;ky;kP;k vkns’kkpk voeku gks.kkj ukgh] ;kphgh n{kr ?;koh- ¼2½ mDr uewn dks.kR;kgh eglqyh U;k;ky;kus vkf.k egkjk"Vª eglwy U;k;kf/kdj.kkus fnysyh varfje Lfkfxrhy dkye;kZnk 6 efgU;kai;Zar ykxw jkghy- eglqyh U;k;ky;kus lcG dkj.kkaP;k vk/kkjs] vioknkRed ifjfLFkrhr v’ks LFkfxrh 6 efgU;kuarj ok<foyh vlsy] rjp rRiqohZ fnysyh LFkfxrh pkyw jkghy] vU;Fkk lnjgq LFkfxrh 6 efgU;kpk dkyko/kh laiY;kuarj vkiksvki O;ixr gksbZy- rlsp] gs vkns’k laiw.kZ jkT;krhy dks.kR;kgh eglqyh vFkok vU; U;k;ky;kus fnysY;k loZ Lfkfxrh vkns’kkyk ykxw jkgrhy- 03- loZ foHkkxh; vk;qDr] ftYgkf/kdkjh o {ks=h; eglwyh izkf/kdkjh o vf/kdkjh ;kauh ;k funsZ’kkaph rkRdkG vaeyctko.kh djkoh- lnj ’kklu ifji=d ’kklukP;k www.maharashtra.gov.in ;k ladsrLFkGkoj miyC/k dj.;kr vkys vlwu R;kpk ladsrkd 202105061613027519 vlk vkgs- gs ifji=d fMthVy Lok{kjhus lk{kkafdr d:u dk<;kr ;sr vkgs- egkjk"Vª egkjk"Vªkps jkT;iky ;kaP;k vkns’kkuqlkj o ukokus- 7. Perusal of the order indicates that the said resolution was made basis for issuing direction to the Tahsildar to take appropriate steps in furtherance of the order which was stayed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2313/2000. The said Government Resolution applies to the revenue proceedings and order of stay passed by such Authorities. There is absolutely no reference therein that even in respect of stay granted by the High Court, in absence of extension thereof, on Umesh PAGE 6 OF 7 WP-5564-2022.odt expiry of six months, the proceedings can be taken up further. In any case, no such administrative order could have been issued by the Government in respect of order passed by High Court. 8. In any case, the grave injustice has been caused to the Petitioners by the act of the Tahsilder directing the Talathi to take further steps. Consequent to the said direction, Talathi has reversed the entries contrary to the order of stay passed by this Court. Thus, the order passed by Tahsildar cannot sustain and hence, is set aside. All consequential actions taken pursuant to the impugned order become redundant. The Concerned Authorities are directed to restore the position of the record in respect of the subject property as on the date of grant of stay by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2313/2000. 9. Petition stands allowed in above terms.
Decision
Pending civil application stands disposed of. (R. M. JOSHI, J.) Umesh PAGE 7 OF 7