MP 1 RPW68_11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION NO. 68 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 9506 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra ... Petitioner Vs. Vishram T. Patil ... Respondent WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 69 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 10411 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Shripati Govind Gurav and others ... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 70 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6009 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Santosh Dinkarrao Baddare and others ... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 71 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 9569 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Govind Laxman Powar ... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 72 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 10416 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Annappa Mhadu Sutar and others ... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 73 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 9571 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Dyanu Appa Patil and others ... Respondents MP 2 RPW68_11 WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 74 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5911 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Govind Vithu Jingare since deceased through Kasuai Krishna Jingare and another ... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 75 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5913 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Keshav Shivram Gholkar ... Respondent WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 76 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5912 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Nikalo Motesh Bardeskar ... Respondent WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 77 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5914 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Rau Vithu Patil and others ... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 78 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 10145 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Shankar Dhondi Patil since deceased through Bhau Sakharam Dhondi Patil and others... Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 79 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 9570 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Ratnabai Pandit Patil and others ... Respondents MP 3 RPW68_11 WITH REVIEW PETITION NO. 80 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 10414 OF 2009 The State of Maharashtra and others ... Petitioners Vs. Hari Satba Chougale and others ... Respondents Mr. A. I. I. Patel, AGP for the Petitioner State. Mr. N. V. Walawalkar, Senior Counsel i/b. Mr. G. M. Savagave for Respondents. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA & A.M. THIPSAY, JJ. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2011 P. C. : Heard the learned AGP for the State and the learned Senior Counsel for respondents, who are the original petitioners. 2. The original petitioners had filed Writ Petitions before this Court contending that they were project affected persons, and orders of allotment of land to them were passed long back. But in spite of the said orders, they were not being given possession of the land as per the allotment orders. It appears that the petitions were taken on Board after taking circulation, and on very first date, in view of the order relied upon by the petitioners, this Court had taken up the petitions forthwith and directed the State to complete the process of handing over the possession of land within three months, if there was no legal impediment like stay / injunction of any Court and Writ Petitions were disposed of immediately. It appears that the Government Pleader had also not taken any instructions from the Government or the concerned Collector, presumably because he also believed that the allotment orders, on which the petitioners had placed reliance, were genuine. 3. Now the Review Petitions are filed on the ground that in nine petitions bearing Review Petition No. 68 of 2011, 69 of 2011, 70 of 2011, 71 of 2011, 72 of 2011, 77 of 2011, 78 of 2011, 79 of 2011 and 80 of 2011, no such allotment MP 4 RPW68_11 orders were ever issued by the concerned officer and the claimants had filed the Writ Petitions before this Court on the basis of forged and fabricated documents. It is contended that in four other Writ Petitions, in which Review Petition Nos. 73 of 2011, 74 of 2011, 75 of 2011 and 76 of 2011 are filed, the orders were signed by the concerned Settlement Officer but those orders were also prepared falsely and illegally by that concerned officer without any basis for the same. It is further contended that the petitioners, in those Writ Petitions, were also not entitled to any such allotment, and therefore, even if the orders were signed and issued by the concerned Settlement Officer, the orders were illegal and void ab initio. Therefore, State has filed these Review Petitions to recall the orders passed by this Court to complete the process of handing over the possession on the basis of the said disputed allotment orders. 4. After perusal of the reply filed by respondents / original petitioners and after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, it is clear that the State of Maharashtra has come with a plea that the petitioners / claimants could not have succeeded in the Writ Petitions, if reply of the State would have been filed in those Writ Petitions. Serious challenge has been posed to the claim of the original petitioners by filing these Review Petitions. Taking into consideration the contentions raised by the State and the circumstances noted above, in our opinion, the matters need to be scrutinized and heard minutely after giving opportunity to the State to file written statements in the Writ Petitions. 5. Therefore, in the interests of justice, we allow these Review Petitions and recall the orders passed in the said Writ Petitions and direct that the said Writ Petitions be placed before the regular Division Bench for hearing and disposal as per law. The contentions of both the parties are kept open to be considered by the Division Bench hearing the Petitions. (J.H. BHATIA, J.) (A.M. THIPSAY, J.)