1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 1520 of 1996 Petitioner : Jai Mahakali Adiwasi Griha Nirman Sahkari Sanstha Limited, through its Secretary Munnasingh Premsingh Pawaria, aged about 35 years, resident of Chimta Ground, Hinganghat, District Wardha versus Respondents : 1) State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mumbai 2) State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Urban Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai 3) State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 4) Commissioner, Nagpur Division, 2 Nagpur 6) Sub-Divisional officer, Wardha Mr R.C. Madkholkar, Advocate for petitioner Mr A.R. Taywade, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents Coram : B.P. Dharmadhikari & A.P. Bhangale,JJ Dated : 6th September 2011 Oral Judgment (Per B. P. Dharmadhikari, J) 1. The matter was heard for quite some time on 16th August 2011 and then by a reasoned order, the same was adjourned giving respondents no. 5 and 6 liberty to pass appropriate order if land sufficient to accommodate 27 members of petitioner Sanstha was available. 2. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has thereafter filed an affidavit on 30th August 2011 explaining the situation. Total area of Nazul Land Block No. 7, Plot No. 14/1 and 16/2 is 3,31,208 square feet. In paragraph 5 of the said affidavit, possession of petitioner is accepted. However, it is pointed out that these 27 persons are in 3 possession of 12,717 square feet portion of land allotted to ESI Hospital. It is claimed that they are in possession of said portion out of 30,000 square feet plot allotted to ESI Hospital. Subsequently, names of 12 original members and area in their occupation is also given. Said area in possession of 12 members was 4512 square feet. In later part of affidavit, 15 other names who claim to be close relatives of above-mentioned 12 members are also given and it is pointed out that either they are close relatives or encroachers. Area in their possession is disclosed to be 8205 square feet. A spot inspection report dated 23.8.2011 is also filed on record. Report is signed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Hinganghat and Deputy Collector (Land Revenue) as representative of Collector, Wardha. 3. Learned Assistant Government Pleader has pointed out that petitioner Sanstha has gone in liquidation on 27.3.2000 and its name is removed and registration cancelled on 31.3.2000. According to her, this order has attained finality. 4. Mr P.C. Madkholkar has stated that the liquidation 4 proceedings and action of removal of the name of petitioner Sanstha as registered society has been questioned before the Competent Authority. 5. It is apparent that petitioner Sanstha is not in existence and the petition as filed by it, therefore, is not sustainable. 6. The affidavit filed by respondents reveals possession of 12 members of the petitioner Society and remaining 15 persons are claimed to be encroachers. The affidavit also shows that area of 12,717 square feet is in possession of these 27 persons which is out of 30000 square fee portion allotted to ESI Hospital. 7. In these circumstances, as the petition is not maintainable and grievance cannot be looked into any further, we dispose of the petition. The members of petitioner (erst-while) Sanstha in possession of certain portion of land can make appropriate individual representation to respondent no. 5 Collector for ventilation of their grievance, if any, within a period of four weeks from today. If any such representation is made, respondent 5 no. 5 is free to consider the same in accordance with law. Such consideration shall, however, be within further period of eight weeks thereafter. 8. With these observations and directions, we dispose of writ petition. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. A. P. BHANGALE, J B. P. DHARMADHIKARI, J joshi