Case Note & Summary
The writ petitions were filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. The litigation comprised four connected petitions: Writ Petition No.13576 of 2019, Writ Petition No.13928 of 2019, Writ Petition No.14787 of 2019, and Writ Petition No.3760 of 2021. The petitioners included individuals and a registered partnership firm, while the respondents included State of Maharashtra through Ministry of Revenue and Forest, Additional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Collector, Ahmednagar, and numerous private parties, many of whom were deceased and represented by legal heirs. The dispute appeared to relate to land revenue and succession, as indicated by the involvement of revenue authorities and extensive lists of legal representatives. The first petitioner in WP No.13576/2019 was Mangla Sharad Mutha, acting through power of attorney holder Ashok Bansilal Mutha; she also appeared as legal heir of deceased petitioner Sharad Mansukhlal Mutha. The second petitioner set included Nirmal Sharad Mutha and others. WP No.13928/2019 was filed by Luniya Munot and Company, a registered partnership firm under the Partnership Act, 1932, through its partner Rasik Zumbarlal Luniya. WP No.3760/2021 was filed by Rasik Zumbarlal Luniya individually. WP No.14787/2019 was filed by Smt. Imratbai Vijaykumar Munot. The respondents in the first three petitions included State of Maharashtra, Additional Commissioner, Collector, and private respondents such as Chhotibi w/o Karimbhai (deceased through legal heirs), Mahadu s/o Narayan Pawar (deceased through legal heirs), and Hasan Babu Zarekari. WP No.3760/2021 added further private respondents, including several deceased individuals represented by their legal heirs, such as Mamulabai Mehboobbhai Zarekari, Babu Sagulal Zarekari, Rangnath Yashwant Pandit, Bhaskar Pandurang Hiwale, Sakaram Mahadev Misal, Ramchandra Gopinath Misal, and Laxman Sitaram Bhosale. The advocates appearing for the parties were named in the cause title. The provided text did not include the factual background, pleadings, evidence, or legal submissions; it ended before the court's reasoning and order. Consequently, the specific relief sought, the issues framed, arguments advanced, and the final decision could not be ascertained from the available extract. The citation of the judgment was 2023:BHC-AUG:27266.
Issue of Consideration
WRIT PETITION NO.13576 OF 2019 A
