High Court of Bombay

VishnugopalAnd Ors. vs. The State Of Maharashtra

MANU/MH/4431/2023

23.10.2023

Civil

In exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, factual determination of rights cannot be undertaken

Challenge raised in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 is to the decision taken as indicated in the Note Sheet dated 8th March, 2021 by the second Respondent-Nagpur Municipal Corporation through its Municipal Commissioner with regard to taking over possession of land for public utility purpose and preparing a possession receipt in that regard. Challenge is also raised to the possession receipt.

Unless the basic issue with regard to right, title and interest in the subject land is determined in the light of the rival claims of the petitioners and the President of the fourth respondent, the prayer seeking a declaration that President of the fourth respondent had no right to surrender the property in favour of the Municipal Corporation cannot be adjudicated. It would therefore be necessary for the Petitioners to establish their legal rights in the subject property first before the prayers sought by them could be considered. In exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, such factual determination of rights cannot be undertaken.

Present Court decline to entertain the writ petition and consider the prayers made therein on merits. Instead, it would be open for the Petitioners to invoke appropriate jurisdiction for seeking resolution of the disputed questions that arise in the present proceedings.

The writ petition is not entertained since it seeks resolution of various disputed questions. Keeping all points raised in the writ petition open and with liberty to the Petitioners to invoke appropriate jurisdiction in accordance with law for seeking redressal of their grievances, the writ petition is disposed of.

Tags : Possession Public utility Legality

Share :