1 wp 7210.24.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7210 OF 2024 Manohar Bhagaji Gaikwad VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra Through It’s Principal Secretary And Others ... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. I.K. Wagh AGP for Respondents : Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya ... CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR AND NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ. Dated : July 04, 2025 FINAL ORDER :- 1. The petitioner impugns the communications/order dated 20.11.2023 and 2.2.2024 issued by respondent no.5 Tahsildar, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar and also seeks writ of mandamus/directions against the respondent authorities to take appropriate decision for regularization of the Government/Gairan land in favour of petitioner in terms of directions given by the Supreme Court of India in case of Jagpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab as well as policy laid down in the Government Resolution dated 12.7.2011. 2. Mr. Ishwar Wagh, learned advocate appearing for petitioner submits that petitioner belongs to ‘Kaikadi 2025:BHC-AUG:18120-DB 2 wp 7210.24.odt Community’, which is recognized as ‘Scheduled Caste’. He is landless person. The petitioner is in possession of Gairan/Grampanchayat land gat no.32 situated at Zalta, Tq. & District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar since more than 35 years. Entry as to encroachment of the petitioner has been mutated in revenue record on 20.10.2011 for area admeasuring 2 H. The petitioner is cultivating land and earning his livelihood. Encroachment of petitioner has been certified by village Panchayat vide certificate dated 12.6.2012 thereby acknowledging possession of the petitioner for more than 25 years over the Gairan Land. Petitioner made an application for regularization of his encroachment in terms of the Government Resolution dated 28.11.1991 which stipulates that Government has taken decision to regularize the encroachments made by landless labours or persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribes. Accordingly, on 11.4.2018 District Collector, Aurangabad had addressed a communication to Tahsildar directing him to examine proposal of petitioner in terms of Government Resolutions dated 28.11.1991 and 12.7.2011 and take further decision. Further, Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad has issued a communication dated 30.10.2018 directing the District Collector, Aurangabad to 3 wp 7210.24.odt consider and decide proposal of the petitioner for regularization of the encroachment. 3. Mr. Wagh, would further submit that, in light of guidelines laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in case of Jagpal Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2011) (11) SCC 396 and in terms of the Government Resolution of the year 2011, petitioner is entitled for regularization of the encroachment. However, respondent authorities have failed to take appropriate decision. 4. Per contra, Mr. P.K.Lakhotiya, learned AGP appearing for Respondents/ State relying on affidavit-in-reply filed by Mr. Paresh Gajanan Choudhary, Tahsildar, Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar submits that land gat no.23 at village Zalta is a Government land. Petitioner is encroacher. It is not a case of authorized possession or lease by the Stat Government in favour of the petitioner. In these circumstances, petitioner's claim does not fit in Government Policy of regularization in terms of Government Resolutions issued in year 2011 or directions given by Supreme Court of India in case of Jagpal Singh (supra). Mr. Lakhotiya, would further submit that, this Court in Criminal Application No.516 of 2015 issued directions 4 wp 7210.24.odt to the State authorities to not to regularize encroachments made by private persons on Government Gairan land. In light of the aforesaid crystallized legal position, petitioner's claim for regularization of unauthorized encroachment on Government Land has been rejected and decision is communicated to the petitioner. 5. Having considered submissions advanced by learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and on perusal of record tendered into service before this Court, it is discernible that petitioner is a landless person belonging to Scheduled Caste Community. The entry as to his encroachment on land gat no.32 admeasuring 2H is firstly recorded in the year 2010-2011 vide mutation entry dated 20.10.2011. There is no authentic record as to his possession over Government land barring aforesaid entry. Although, petitioner relies on a certificate issued by Sarpanch of village Panchayat Zalta-Sundarwadi that petitioner is in possession of the Gairan land for last 25 years, however, this certificate cannot be considered as an authentic document on the point of encroachment. 5 wp 7210.24.odt 6. Petitioner moved his proposal for regularization of encroachment in the year 2016. Eventually, such proposal will have to be dealt with in accordance with the policy laid down by the State of Maharashtra under Government Resolution dated 12.7.2011 and directions given by the Supreme Court of India in case of Jagpal Singh and ors Vs. State of Punjab. 7. In paragraph no.14 of the decision in case of Jagpal Singh and others after referring to the decision in case of M.I. Builders (P). Ltd., Vs. Radhey Shyam Sahu reported in 1999 (6) SCC 464 and Friends Colony, Development Committee Vs. State of Orissa reported in 2004 (8) SCC 733 following observations are made, which reads as under :- “In our opinion this decision will apply with even greater force in cases of encroachment of village common land. Ordinarily, compounding in such cases should only be allowed where the land has been leased to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or the land is actually being used for a public purpose of the village e.g. running a school for the villagers, or a dispensary for them.” 8. Further, in paragraph no.22 while directing the State Governments to frame the scheme for speedy eviction of illegal occupants, following observations are made, which reads thus :- 6 wp 7210.24.odt “Long duration of such illegal occupation or huge expenditure in making constructions thereon or political connections must not be treated as a justification for condoning this illegal act or for regularizing the illegal possession. Regularization should only be permitted in exceptional cases e.g. where lease has been granted under some Government notification to landless labourers or members of Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes, or where there is already a school, dispensary or other public utility on the land.” 9. In deference to the decision in case of Jagpal Singh, State of Maharashtra framed policy for removal of the encroachments. Clause nos. 3 and 4 of aforesaid Resolution reads thus :- ^^3- v’kh vfrdze.ks [kqi dkyko/kh iklwuph vkgsr fdaok R;kojhy cka/kdkekoj izpaM [kpZ dj.;kr vkyk vkgs v’kk dkj.kkLro dks.kR;kgh vfrdze.kkl laj{k.k ns.;kr ;sm u;s rFkk v’kh vfrdze.ks fu;ekuqdwy dj.;kr ;sow u;sr- 4- T;k izdj.kkr ‘kklukP;k fu.kZ;k}kjs Hkwehfgu ‘ksretwj] vuqlwfpr tkrh@tekrhrhy O;Drh bR;knhaps vfrdze.k fu;ekuqdwy dj.;kckcr ;kiwohZp fu.kZ; ?ks.;kr vkyk vkgs] v’kh vfrdze.ks rlsp ‘kkGk] nok[kkuk fdaok brj lkoZtfud iz;kstukFkZ cka/kdke ;kaph vxksnjp vfLrRokr vlysyh vfrdze.ks oxG.;kr ;kohr-** 10. In light of aforesaid crystallized legal position, if case of the petitioner is examined, it is evident that petitioner could not bring on record any authentic material indicating his encroachment was proceeded by lawful entry like lease by 7 wp 7210.24.odt Government. He relies only on mutation entry dated 20.10.2011, which is subsequent to Government Resolution of the year 2011. Admittedly, petitioner's entry over the Gairan land is as a Rank Encroacher and not permissive in nature. Although, encroachments of persons belonging to backward classes, particularly, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes can be considered for regularization, it is in the exceptional case, only where initial possession is permissive in nature. The aforesaid exception have no application where person is Rank Encroacher and taking benefit of lapses in administration or by collusion with officers, continued such possession. 11. As rightly, pointed out by Mr. Lakhotiya, learned AGP, Division Bench of this court in Suo Moto Public Interest Litigation No.2 of 2022 (High Court on its own Motion Vs. State of Maharashtra and others) passed interim order dated 6.10.2022 directing that “there shall be no further regularization of any encroachment by any authority/officer of Government until further orders of this Court, except in the manner directed by the Supreme Court in Jagpal Singh”. 12. On careful scrutiny of petitioner's case in light of the directives of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Jagpal 8 wp 7210.24.odt Singh, no right is available to petitioner to seek regularization of his encroachment. 13. In that view of the matter, we find writ petition is devoid of merits, hence dismissed. ( NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J. ) ( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. ) aaa/- ….