Full Judgment Text
NONREPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 80148015 OF 2022
Rajaram Abasaheb Deshmukh …Appellant(s)
Versus
State of Maharashtra and Ors. …Respondent(s)
J U D G M E N T
M.R. SHAH, J.
1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned
common judgment and order dated 29.04.2022 passed by
the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition
No. 2876/2022 and Writ Petition (WP) No. 9109/2021, by
which, the High Court has allowed WP No. 9109/2021
preferred by respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein (in Civil Appeal
arising out of WP No. 9109/2021) and has quashed and set
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
NIRMALA NEGI
Date: 2022.11.04
16:23:58 IST
Reason:
aside orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 passed by
1
the Deputy Collector, Pune Division and consequently
dismissed WP No. 2876/2022, the original writ petitioner
in WP No. 2876/2022 contesting respondent No. 1 in WP
No. 9109/2021 has preferred the present appeals.
2. The facts leading to the present appeals in a nutshell are
as under:
2.1 That both, the appellant as well as contesting respondent
Nos. 1 to 4 (in Civil Appeal arising out of WP No.
9109/2021) are claiming to be project affected persons
whose lands were acquired for the public purpose. The
Sub Divisional Officer allotted the land in question vide
order dated 31.10.2018 in favour of respondent No. 1
herein (in Civil Appeal arising out of WP No. 9109/2021) –
Kaluram Mahadu Jadhav @ Kalooram Mahadoo Jadhav
under the Rehabilitation Scheme. Subsequently, the very
land which was allotted to Kaluram Jadhav came to be
allotted in favour of the appellant herein – Rajaram
Deshmukh by the Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation), Pune
Division vide order dated 21.02.2019. Respondent No. 1
herein – Kaluram Jadhav, therefore, filed WP No.
3126/2019 before the High Court challenging order of
2
allotment dated 21.02.2019 which was in favour of
Rajaram Deshmukh – appellant herein. The Division
Bench of the High Court disposed of the said writ petition,
remanded the matter to the Deputy Collector
(Rehabilitation) and directed to pass a fresh order of
allotment of the land in question expeditiously. That
thereafter, after giving opportunity to both the parties
including the coowners of land held by Kaluram Jadhav,
the Deputy Collector vide order dated 02.01.2020 passed a
fresh order of allotment in favour of Rajaram Deshmukh –
appellant herein and cancelled the order of allotment in
favour of Kaluram Jadhav. Thereafter, consequential order
dated 17.02.2020 came to be passed by the Deputy
Collector in favour of Rajaram Deshmukh allotting the
land in question. That thereafter the appellant herein
initiated the proceedings before the Talathi to mutate his
name in the revenue record as per the allotment order.
However, as the name of the appellant was not mutated in
the revenue record despite the allotment order, appellant
herein Rajaram Deshmukh filed WP No. 2876/2022
before the High Court. Simultaneously, respondent Nos. 1
3
to 4 filed WP No. 9109/2021 before the High Court
challenging the subsequent orders of allotment dated
02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 in favour of the appellant
herein. By the impugned common judgment and order the
High Court has set aside orders dated 02.01.2020 and
17.02.2020 and remanded the matter to the Additional
Collector solely on the ground that the Deputy Collector
did not possess the powers to pass the orders of allotment
and therefore, orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020
are bad in law and wholly without jurisdiction.
Consequently, the High Court has allowed WP No.
9109/2021 preferred by respondent Nos. 1 to 4 herein and
disposed of WP No. 2876/2022 preferred by the appellant
herein. The impugned common judgment and order passed
by the High Court is the subject matter of the present
appeals.
3. Shri Nikhil Goel learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent No. 1 – Kaluram Jadhav (in Civil Appeal arising
out of WP No. 9109/2021) has submitted that pursuant to
the impugned judgment and order passed by the High
Court the Additional Collector has passed a fresh order
4
which is in favour of respondent No. 1. It is submitted that
at the relevant time the Deputy Collector exercised the
powers of allotment as delegatee. However, subsequently
and before orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 were
passed the powers/authorities of Deputy Collector of Pune
Division of allotment was taken away and therefore, the
High Court has rightly observed that orders dated
02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 were coram nonjudice . It is
submitted that therefore as such no error has been
committed by the High Court in quashing and setting
aside orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 and
thereafter directing the Additional Collector to take a
decision afresh with regard to allotment of the land in
question.
3.1 Number of submissions have been made by learned
counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties on
merits in support of their respective claims for allotment of
the land in question as project affected persons. However,
as the High Court has not at all decided the claims of
respective parties on merits and for the reasons stated
5
hereinbelow we propose to remand the matter to the High
Court, we are not considering the submissions on merits.
4. Now so far as the impugned common judgment and order
passed by the High Court is concerned the High Court has
set aside orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 passed
by the Deputy Collector solely on the ground that orders
were passed by the Deputy Collector without jurisdiction
and therefore, the same is coram nonjudice. However, it is
required to be noted that the Deputy Collector was
directed to take a fresh decision pursuant to order dated
11.10.2019 passed by the Division Bench of the High
Court in WP No. 3126/2019 which was as such in the writ
petition filed by respondent No. 1 – Kaluram Jadhav. The
order dated 11.10.2019 passed by the Division Bench of
the High Court in WP No. 3126/2019 by which the Deputy
Collector was directed to take a fresh decision attained the
finality. Therefore, the High Court ought not to have set
aside orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 passed by
the Deputy Collector on the ground that the same was
without jurisdiction and coram nonjudice . At this stage, it
is required to be noted that after order dated 02.01.2020,
6
the said order was sent to the Collector and thereafter, the
formal order of allotment dated 17.02.2020 was passed.
Therefore, the High Court has seriously erred in setting
aside orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 on the
ground that the Deputy Collector was not having
jurisdiction and therefore order is coram non judice. Under
the circumstances impugned common judgment and order
passed by the High Court quashing and setting aside
orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 on the aforesaid
ground is unsustainable. However, at the same time as the
High Court has not considered the legality and validity of
orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 on merits and
has not considered the rival claims of the respective
parties on merits, the matter is required to be remanded to
the High Court for fresh decision to consider the legality
and validity of orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 on
merits.
5. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above the
impugned common judgment and order dated 29.04.2022
passed by the High Court quashing and setting aside
orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 is hereby
7
quashed and set aside. The subsequent order dated
02.08.2022 passed by the Additional Collector, Pune
Division, which has been passed pursuant to the
impugned common judgment and order dated 29.04.2022
passed by the High Court is also quashed and set aside.
The matter is remitted to the High Court to decide the
aforesaid writ petitions afresh in accordance with law and
on its own merits.
6. Now, the High Court to consider the legality and validity of
orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020 on merits. It will
be open for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 (in Civil Appeal arising
out of WP No. 9109/2021) to file impleadment
application(s) before the High Court and make the
submissions before the High Court as they were heard by
the Deputy Collector. The Writ Petition Nos. 2876/2022
and 9109/2021 are ordered to be restored on the file of the
High Court for a fresh decision on merits as observed
hereinabove. The present appeals are accordingly allowed.
However, it is made clear that we have not expressed
anything on merits in favour of either party on the legality
and validity of orders dated 02.01.2020 and 17.02.2020
8
and the claims made by the rival parties and it is
ultimately for the High Court to consider the legality and
validity of the aforesaid orders in accordance with law and
on its own merits. The present appeals are accordingly
allowed to the aforesaid extent. No costs.
………………………………….J.
[M.R. SHAH]
NEW DELHI; ………………………………….J.
NOVEMBER 04, 2022 [M.M. SUNDRESH]
9