The petitioners by way of this petition has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order dated 08.06.2011 passed by respondent no.1 on the basis of remarks received from the concerned Collector with regard to the position of the land vis-a-vis the numbers of cattle to be fed from the available "gauchar lands". The petitioners have submitted that the petitioners' application was dated 15.02.2005 and Collector's opinion was of 27.11.2006, which was contrary to the opinions of the Panchayat and other authority i.e. Mamlatdar. However, the petitioners were for the first time called upon to remain present for being heard on 15.02.2011 and on petitioners absence, on that day, it was treated as they have remained absent without reason and ultimately order came to be passed on 08.06.2011.
The petitioners' advocate has urged that without going into the merits of the matter, Court may quash this order and remand that matter to respondent no.1 for deciding it afresh after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners.
Learned AGP appearing for the State submitted that there cannot be any objection to such a request but now petitioners shall remain present, if they are so chooses, or else the authority would pass appropriate order.
In view of this, the order impugned is quashed and set aside. The quashing of this order is not to be treated as order is quashed on merits. The concerned authority is required to afford an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners on the report of the Collector. The notice for being heard should be issued and the entire proceeding of hearing should be over in which the petitioners should cooperate and the entire proceedings, therefore, should be over within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of this order. Once again it is reiterated for the clarification of all, that quashment of the order impugned in this petition may not be construed as accepting the case of the petitioners in its totality. The matter is remanded only for the purpose of affording an opportunity to the petitioners of being heard and the concerned authority is thus at a liberty to come to the conclusion after hearing to the petitioners and after affording an opportunity to the petitioners.
It goes without saying that the petitioners will have at liberty to approach the Court with fresh order, in case if, the order is adverse. The petition is disposed of. Notice is discharged. No costs.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) Pankaj Top