1 wp10523.10 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 10523 OF 2010 _____________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | appearances, Court's | Court’s or Judge’s orders orders or | directions and | Registrar's orders | _____________________________________________________________________ Mr. V.S. Kadam, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.P. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent nos.1 to 3. 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Kadam for the petitioner- defendant and Advocate Mr. Deshpande for the respondent nos.1 to 3. 2. Mr. Kadam submits that taking advantage of incomplete scheme of consolidation, the respondents- plaintiffs are trying to obtain report of Commissioner and efforts is only to collect evidence. Learned Counsel states that the measurement needs to be carried out ignoring incomplete scheme and with reference to survey numbers. He further states that if so measured, the claim for encroachment will not be substantiated at all. 3. Mr. Deshpande for respondents/plaintiffs state that the trial Court has only asked the T.I.L.R. to complete the 2 wp10523.10 work of measurement. Relevant objections to that measurement can be taken by parties after receipt of report. 4. After hearing parties, I am satisfied that in a suit for removal of alleged encroachment, the trial Court has found appointment of Commissioner necessary. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity. Learned Counsel for petitioners-defendants is anticipating some mischief at the hands of authorities undertaking such measurement. This Court can not accept such contention. Whether the scheme for consolidation is incomplete or then whether the measurement is done with reference to survey numbers or then incomplete scheme are questions which can be gone into after the report of T.I.L.R. is actually received by the trial Court. At this stage, it will be futile exercise. The T.I.L.R. Government Officer is bond to measure land in accordance with law. 5. Hence, with liberty to the petitioner to raise such contentions at the appropriate juncture, the present Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. (B.P. DHARMADHIKARI) JUDGE. 27.01.2011 gas/wp10523.10