Bombay High Court
MCA/655/2003 of SHRI DAMODAR J.KAVLEKAR AND ANR., Vs DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT AND 3 ORS., on 15 December 2003
COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 655 OF 2003 SHRI DAMODAR J.KAVLEKAR AND ANR., ....Applicants Versus DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT AND 3 ORS., ....Respondents SHRI AMRUT KANSAR,AG WITH MR.H.D.NAIK,AGA- Coram:- A.M.KHANWILKAR & P. V. HARDAS, JJ. Date:- 15th December, 2003 P.C.: Writ
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA
MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 655 OF 2003SHRI DAMODAR J.KAVLEKAR AND ANR.,
....Applicants
Versus
DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT AND 3 ORS.,
....Respondents
SHRI AMRUT KANSAR,AG WITH MR.H.D.NAIK,AGA- -Coram:A.M.KHANWILKAR &P. V. HARDAS, JJ.-Date:15th December, 2003
P.C.:
Writ Petition no.144 of 2002 was disposed of by this Court vide Order dated 29thJuly, 2002. While doing so, thepetitioner/applicant herein was grantedtime to remove and/or demolish the suitstructure, in the event his applicationfor regularization was rejected by theappropriate authority. It is not indispute that the application forregularization has since been rejected.In the circumstances, the applicant wasobliged to vacate and remove the suit structure in terms of the said undertaking. Instead, the applicant has moved thisapplication pointing out that he willadhere to his undertaking given to theCourt, but according to him it would beappropriate that the suit structure beallowed to remain as it is to be used for charitable purposes by the Devasthan Committee.
Having regard to the suggestion made inthe present application and though theDevasthan Committee was not a party to the original Writ Petition, or for thatmatter even in this application, wepermitted the applicant to implead theDevasthan Committee as a party respondent in this application. Notice was issuedto the said Committee. In response tothe said notice Shri. Soiru Varde,Attorney of Shree Shantadurga Saunsthanhas appeared in person espousing the cause of Shree Shantadurga Devasthan Saunsthan.He States that the suggestion mabeby the applicant in this application isnot acceptable to the committee. On theother hand, the Committee is interestedin getting back the vacant possessionof the disputed protion of land.In view of the stand taken by theCommittee the main prayer as made inthis application cannot be acceded to.It is recroded that the applicant hasalready vacated the disputed structureand the only question that remains isregarding its demolition.In the circumstances, respondent no.3 totake steps to demolish the suitstructure at the cost of the applicant.The applicant to deposit the necessaryamount towards the estimated cost ofdemolition with the Panchayat within two weeks from today. The Panchayat to demolish the structure not later thanfour weeks from today.Application disposed on the above terms.
A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.
P. V. HARDAS, J.