Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Rosario Valadares, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the construction of a restaurant by the respondents on alleged encroachment of community land (Communidade land). The petitioner claimed that the respondents had illegally constructed a restaurant on land belonging to the Communidade of Pilerne, without obtaining necessary permissions from the authorities. The respondents included the Chief Secretary, Collector, private individuals, and various government departments. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ to direct the respondents to remove the encroachment and restore the land to its original condition. The Court, after hearing the parties, observed that the petitioner had an alternative statutory remedy under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (MLRC), which provides for summary eviction of persons in unauthorized occupation of land. The Court held that the writ petition was not maintainable as the petitioner had not exhausted the alternative remedy. The Court dismissed the writ petition and the accompanying miscellaneous civil application, granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the Collector under Section 127 of the MLRC. The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the case.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Alternative Remedy - Article 226 of Constitution of India - Section 127 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - The petitioner challenged the construction of a restaurant on alleged encroachment of community land. The Court held that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 127 of the MLRC before the Collector, and therefore the writ petition was not maintainable. The Court dismissed the petition on the ground of non-exhaustion of alternative remedy, without expressing any opinion on the merits. (Paras 1-16) B) Land Revenue - Encroachment on Community Land - Section 127 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 - The petitioner alleged that the respondents had encroached upon community land (Communidade land) and constructed a restaurant without proper permissions. The Court noted that the remedy under Section 127 of the MLRC provides for summary eviction of encroachers and is an efficacious alternative remedy. The Court directed the petitioner to approach the Collector under Section 127 of the MLRC. (Paras 1-16)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable when the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966, and whether the petition should be dismissed on the ground of non-exhaustion of alternative remedy.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition and the miscellaneous civil application, holding that the petitioner had an alternative efficacious remedy under Section 127 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The Court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Collector under Section 127 of the MLRC. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Alternative remedy
- Exhaustion of statutory remedies
- Writ jurisdiction under Article 226
- Section 127 of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- 1966
- Maintainability of writ petition
