1 wp 3422.98 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3422 OF 1998 1. Rukminbai Raghunath Ingale, Age : 60 Years, Occu. : Agril., R/o Jorwe, Tq. Sangamner, District Ahmednagar. (Deleted as per Court’s Order dated 06.07.2001 passed in Civil Application No. 3702/2001.) 2. Raghunath Bhikaji Ingale, Age : 65 Years, Occu. : Agril., Resident as above. 3. Bhagwat Anandrao Thorate, Age : 60 Years, Occu. : Agril., R/o as above. .. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Additional Collector, Ahmednagar. 2. Datta S/o Zelyabapu Dighe, Age : 32 Years, Occu. : Agril., 3. Sanjay S/o Raosaheb Dighe, Age : 29 Years, Occu. : Agril., 2 wp 3422.98 Both R/o Jorwe, Tq. Sangamner, District Ahmednagar. .. .. Respondents Shri V. S. Bedre, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. B. Pulkundwar, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State. Shri S. K. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent No. 2 and 3. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 06TH JULY, 2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : . Heard Shri Bedre, the learned counsel for petitioners, Shri S. K. Shinde, the learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent/State. 2. The petitioners assail the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik thereby restoring the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer forfeiting the land on the ground that the petitioners have violated the conditions. 3. The petitioners are purchasers of the suit land from Anandibai vide the registered sale deed. The property was received by Anandibai in a compromise. The present respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed a complaint contending that the petitioners 3 wp 3422.98 have violated/committed breach of the terms of the grants, as the land was a vatan inam land. After the land became khalsa the amount of occupancy/grant was not paid within the stipulated period and as such the petitioners had no right to retain the land. 4. The Sub Divisional Officer vide its judgment ordered the land to be forfeited and transferred to the Government. The petitioners preferred appeal. The Deputy Collector, Ahmednagar allowed the appeal and remanded the matter back to the Sub Divisional Officer. Aggrieved thereby the present respondent Dattatraya preferred revision before the Commissioner, who allowed the revision and restored the order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer. Aggrieved thereby the present writ petition has been filed. 5. Shri Bedre, the learned counsel for petitioners submits that in fact, the amount of grant was already deposited. Even the State has accepted this fact in the affidavit in reply. There was no reason for the Commissioner to observe that the amount has not been deposited. As the amount was paid the land was converted into an old tenure from the new tenure. As such, when the amount was already deposited the Commissioner could not 4 wp 3422.98 have passed the impugned order. 6. Shri S. K. Shinde, the learned counsel supports the order passed by the Commissioner. 7. With the assistance of learned counsel, I have gone through the judgment and the affidavit filed on record. 8. The State has also filed an affidavit in reply. The State has accepted the fact that the regrant order was passed on 12.12.1971 and the amount of Rs. 520/- was deposited in the Government Treasury vide challan dated 22.10.1990. Only because no specific order was passed that the land became a land of old tenure the rights of the parties cannot be taken away when the fact is admitted that the amount after the order of regrant has been deposited. This would show that the petitioners had complied with the necessary condition. There was no reason to forfeit the land. Even the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 did not have any locus standi to file a complaint in as much as they had no right, title or interest in the suit land. 9. The fact of the deposit of the amount of Rs. 520/- being not disputed, on the contrary admitted by the State, I do not see any 5 wp 3422.98 reason for the Government to forfeit the said land. 10. In the result the writ petition is allowed. The rule is made absolute and the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Sangamner dated 04 th October, 1997 and all consequent orders passed thereto are quashed and set aside. No costs. Sd/- [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/July 11