{"id":229500,"date":"2009-02-03T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-02-02T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009"},"modified":"2015-05-12T12:03:12","modified_gmt":"2015-05-12T06:33:12","slug":"ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009","title":{"rendered":"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court<\/div>\n
Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009<\/div>\n
Bench: P. R. Borkar<\/div>\n
          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY\n                     BENCH AT AURANGABAD.\n\n\n                WRIT PETITION NO. 3003 OF 1990\n\n\n\n\n                                                               \n     Ganpat s\/o. Ashruba Koli                  ]..Petitioners\n     (since deceased) his L.Rs.\n\n\n\n\n                                       \n     1) Narayan s\/o. Ganpat Koli,\n        Age. 56 yrs., Occ. Service & Agri.\n        R\/o. Wasadi, Tal. Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n                                      \n     2) Ashok s\/o. Ganpat Koli,\n        Age. 42 yrs., Occ. Service & Agri.\n        R\/o. Wasadi, Tal. Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n                             \n     3) Sow. Mandanbai w\/o. Madhavrao Suryawanshi,\n        Age. 50 yrs., Occ. Household & Agri.\n                  \n        R\/o. Borsar, Tal. Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n     4) Sou. Indubai w\/o. Kacharu Wagh,\n                 \n        Age. 48 yrs., Occ. Household & Agri.,\n        R\/o. Nimbhora, Tal. Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n     5. Sou. Sulochana w\/o. Sarjerao Birare,\n        Age. 46 yrs., Occ. Household & Agri.,\n      \n\n\n        R\/o. Ghatshendra, Tal. Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n   \n\n\n\n     6. Sou. Latabai Bhikan Bale,\n        Age. 44 yrs., Occ. Household & Agri.,\n        R\/o. Upla, Tal. Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n\n                            VERSUS\n\n\n     1. The State of Maharashtra               ]..Respondents\n\n\n\n\n\n     2. The Secretary to Govt. of\n        Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Bombay.\n\n     3. The Divisional Commissioner,\n        Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n                                       ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::\n                                        (     2    )\n\n\n\n\n     4. The Collector, Aurangabad.\n\n     5. Sub-Divisional Officer-R,\n        Tal. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                \n     6. Tahsildar, Kannad,\n        Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n                                                        \n     7. Block Development Officer,\n        Tal. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad.\n\n\n\n\n                                                       \n     Shri N.N. Shinde, Advocate for the petitioners.\n     Mrs. B.R. Khekale, A.G.P. for the respondents.\n\n\n                                             CORAM : P.R. BORKAR, J.\n<\/pre>\n
                                             DATED : 3rd FEBRUARY,2009.\n<\/p>\n
     ORAL JUDGMENT :-\n<\/p>\n
                   :\n<\/p>\n
     .        This     is     a    writ petition filed                by     original<\/p>\n
     encroacher – Ganpat Ashruba Koli for regularization of<\/p>\n
     encroachment      made       by   him       in   view      of         Government<\/p>\n
     Resolution      dated     12th September, 1979,                  produced         at<\/p>\n
     Exh.     “B” with the petition and to give directions to<\/p>\n
     the    respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from<\/p>\n
     Survey   No.46     (Gat       No.220) of village               Vasadi,         Tal.\n<\/p>\n
     Kannad   and     to     quash     and        set    aside        order       dated<\/p>\n
     03.02.1988      whereby       the petitioner was informed                      that<\/p>\n
     his    encroachment cannot be regularized as the land is<\/p>\n
     ‘Khalwadi’ (land used for threshing harvest).\n<\/p>\n
     2.       The     facts giving rise to this petition may be<\/p>\n
     stated as below:-\n<\/p>\n
                                                        ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span><\/p>\n
                                        (    3    )\n\n\n\n\n     .          Original       petitioner        Ganpat Ashruba Koli                  was\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                 \n     resident     of     village       Vasadi,         Tal.        Kannad,         Dist.\n\n     Aurangbad.         He claimed that he had been in possession\n\n\n\n\n                                                         \n     of     Survey No.46 (Block No.220) since the time of                             his\n\n     forefather.         They    have       been cultivating              the      land.\n\n\n\n\n                                                        \n     Since     they     have    made       encroachment          over       the      said\n\n     Government        land, as per G.R.             dated 12.09.1979, he is\n\n     entitled     to     have the encroachment                regularized.              He\n\n\n\n\n                                          \n     made     applications       to     that         effect      to       respondent\n\n     authorities.\n\n     by\n                        \n<\/pre>\n
                         However, respondent authorities informed<\/p>\n
            letter dated 03.02.1988 (copy of which is produced<\/p>\n
     at Exh.”Z-1″) that since the land was ‘Khalwadi’, G.R.\n<\/p>\n
     dated     12th September, 1979, is not applicable and his<\/p>\n
     prayer     cannot     be    granted.            At the      same       time      the<\/p>\n
     respondents       have     also       taken steps for             taking        back<\/p>\n
     removal     of encroachment and gave notice of                         eviction.\n<\/p>\n
     In     the circumstances, the petitioner approached                             this<\/p>\n
     Court     for directions to the respondents to regularise<\/p>\n
     the encroachment and not disturbing his possession.\n<\/p>\n
     3.         Respondent Nos.4 and 6 have appeared and filed<\/p>\n
     affidavit-in-reply.           They         stated      that the          land      in<\/p>\n
     question     is     ‘Khalwadi’        and       as such       the      G.R.        in<\/p>\n
     question     is not applicable.              The encroachment               cannot<\/p>\n
                                                         ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>
\n                                           (     4   )<\/p>\n
     be     regularized          under the policy of              the      Government.\n<\/p>\n
     The     respondents relied upon G.R.                    dated 18th January,<\/p>\n
     1996,     copy        of     which is taken on record                 and      marked<\/p>\n
     “R-X”     for     identification.              It is also            stated        that<\/p>\n
     though         Grampanchayat             has   passed        resolution             and<\/p>\n
     recommended case of the petitioner for regularisation,<\/p>\n
     the     property       is       belonging to the            Government.             The<\/p>\n
     Grampanchayat          is       not possessor and\/or owner                   of     the<\/p>\n
     property        and        cannot have any say in disposal of                       the<\/p>\n
     property.         It is also stated that the petitioner                             had<\/p>\n
     made<\/p>\n
              encroachment and cultivating land unauthorizedly<\/p>\n
     since 1970-71 and not prior to that.\n<\/p>\n
     4.         At     Exh.”A” the petitioner produced his                            caste<\/p>\n
     certificate to show that he belonged to Koli Mahadev –\n<\/p>\n
     a Scheduled Tribe.                Exh.     “B” is the G.R.            in question<\/p>\n
     and     it relates to regularization of the                          encroachment<\/p>\n
     made     for     cultivation on the Government waste                           lands,<\/p>\n
     Gairan     lands,          revenue forest lands and forest                        lands<\/p>\n
     incharge        of the Forest Department.                   The criteria            for<\/p>\n
     regularization             were laid down.         The date relevant for<\/p>\n
     regularization             is     31.03.1978.      By the said G.R.                   in<\/p>\n
     question         it         was     made       clear      that        all         those<\/p>\n
     encroachments made in between 01.04.1972 to 31.03.1978<\/p>\n
     irrespective           of         whether      the        encroachment              was<\/p>\n
                                                            ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>
\n                                           (    5    )<\/p>\n
     subsisting            on     31.03.1978            should      be      regularized.\n<\/p>\n
     Various        terms       and conditions for regularization                          are<\/p>\n
     also     laid        down.       The extent to which                regularization<\/p>\n
     can     be     made is also laid down in paragraph                            7.      The<\/p>\n
     G.R.     also lays down that the regularization can be up<\/p>\n
     to a particular             area of land and it is referred to as<\/p>\n
     ‘Standard Area’.             At Exh.      “C” there is a letter dated<\/p>\n
     30.12.1961          informing       the original petitioner                       Ganpat<\/p>\n
     Koli     in response to his application dated                             18.12.1961<\/p>\n
     and     19.12.1961          addressed         to        the    Dy.        Collector,<\/p>\n
     Vaijapur,<\/p>\n
                         that this land was ‘Khalwadi’ land and same<\/p>\n
     cannot be given for cultivation.                        So, it is clear that<\/p>\n
     in     1961-1962           the petitioner had applied for                      getting<\/p>\n
     the     land        from ‘Khalwadi’ for cultivation.                          At     Exh.\n<\/p>\n
     “D”     there is a letter dated 16.08.1962 giving a                                  sort<\/p>\n
     of     certificate that Survey No.46 known as                             ‘Khalwadi’<\/p>\n
     in     record        was cultivable and threshing of                        corn      was<\/p>\n
     never        done     in that land as it was away from                         village<\/p>\n
     locality.            So,     appropriate action as per law may                          be<\/p>\n
     taken.        At Exh.”H” there is a copy of resolution dated<\/p>\n
     25.10.1965          in     which    the        Grampanchayat              stated        in<\/p>\n
     response        to query from superiors that it was informed<\/p>\n
     that the Government was considering granting land from<\/p>\n
     Survey No.46 ‘Khalwadi’ to petitioner Ganpat Ashru for<\/p>\n
     cultivation.               The    land    is       18     acres.            So,       the<\/p>\n
                                                              ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>
\n                                         (    6     )<\/p>\n
     Grampanchayat          resolved that it might be given to                              two<\/p>\n
     families.         It     is     made clear that the land                     was       not<\/p>\n
     required     by the Grampanchayat and it had no objection<\/p>\n
     if it was brought under cultivation.\n<\/p>\n
     5.         Then         there      is        some       correspondence                 and<\/p>\n
     reminders.         At     Exh.”K” there is panchanama drawn                             on<\/p>\n
     06.06.1970,       which         shows that the             petitioner             Ganpat<\/p>\n
     Ashruba     had        been in possession of the                    property           for<\/p>\n
     previous         four     years.        He        had      no     documents            and<\/p>\n
     permission<\/p>\n
                       of the Government.              It is also stated that<\/p>\n
     there were 15 trees of Moha, which were missing at the<\/p>\n
     time     of panchanama.           Petitioner – Ganpat Ashroba                          was<\/p>\n
     informed     not to cultivate the land without permission<\/p>\n
     of     the Tahsil office.           At Exh.         “L” there is a letter<\/p>\n
     dated     09.03.1972,           whereby       the        Tahsildar,           Kannad,<\/p>\n
     called     upon        petitioner Ganpat Ashruba Koli                        to     show<\/p>\n
     cause why action should not be taken against him as he<\/p>\n
     had     illegally        sown Bajra in Survey no.42, which                             was<\/p>\n
     encroachment.            Similar        notice             for        removal           of<\/p>\n
     encroachment        dated        07.08.1972         is produced              at     Exh.\n<\/p>\n
     “M”.      Another notice for removal of the                           encroachment<\/p>\n
     within 3 days and for furnishing explanation was given<\/p>\n
     on     30.06.1975.         Its copy is at Exh.”N”.                     So,        it    is<\/p>\n
     clear     that     1970 onwards the petitioner had                           been       in<\/p>\n
                                                             ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>
\n                                          (    7    )<\/p>\n
     possession          of     the    land   in         question         and    he     was<\/p>\n
     cultivating it.\n<\/p>\n
     6.           At     Exh.”P”      there       is a    public          notification<\/p>\n
     calling        upon objections to granting land in                         question<\/p>\n
     to     the     petitioner.         It was issued by             the      Tahsildar<\/p>\n
     Office.           Its covering letter is at Exh.                    “O”.      So, it<\/p>\n
     is     clear that some of the respondents had taken steps<\/p>\n
     for     regularization           and some procedure was                  followed.\n<\/p>\n
     At     Exh.”T” there is a letter dated 23.10.1986 sent by<\/p>\n
     Talathi<\/p>\n
                    to the Tahsildar regarding information<\/p>\n
     income taken by the petitioner from the land.\n<\/p>\n
                                                                                     about<\/p>\n
                                                                                 At Exh.\n<\/p>\n
     “V”     there is letter dated 21.01.1988 by the Collector<\/p>\n
     calling        some       information        regarding        regularization.\n<\/p>\n
     V.F.         7\/12     extracts are produced at Exh.”X”                      by     the<\/p>\n
     petitioner.              They    show that the land             is     ‘Khalwadi’<\/p>\n
     and the name of the petitioner was shown as cultivator<\/p>\n
     from     1970-71 onwards.           It is mentioned that there                       is<\/p>\n
     encroachment made by the petitioner.                        At Exh.”Y” there<\/p>\n
     is     application          made by some homeless persons to                       the<\/p>\n
     Collector         requesting       that land provided for                   Gharkul<\/p>\n
     Yojna        (scheme       for providing housing to the                    homeless<\/p>\n
     persons)          may be shifted from Block No.220 as the same<\/p>\n
     was     not convenient.           At Exh.”Z-1″, there is letter in<\/p>\n
     question          dated 03.02.1988, which is impugned.                        It     is<\/p>\n
                                                           ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>
\n                                        (   8    )<\/p>\n
     information          by the S.D.O., Vaijapur to the                 Collector<\/p>\n
     that     since the land was ‘Khalwadi’, as per                      G.R.dated<\/p>\n
     03.08.1982, the encroachment cannot be regularized and<\/p>\n
     it is this action which is challenged.\n<\/p>\n
     7.        Learned       Advocate      Shri N.N.        Shinde         for     the<\/p>\n
     petitioner       has        taken me through all above              documents<\/p>\n
     and     argued       that     the petitioner belongs            to     Nomadic<\/p>\n
     Tribe;     he is landless person;              he is in possession of<\/p>\n
     atleast       from     1970-71 onwards as per revenue                  record.\n<\/p>\n
     The<\/p>\n
     land<\/p>\n
             Grampanchayat has passed resolution for<\/p>\n
              for cultivation to the petitioner and under
\n                                                                           granting<\/p>\n
                                                                                   the<\/p>\n
     circumstances the writ petition may be allowed.\n<\/p>\n
     8.        Mrs.         Khekale, learned A.G.P.             appearing          for<\/p>\n
     the respondents argued that as per copy of G.R.                             dated<\/p>\n
     18th     January, 1996, which is marked as Exh.”R-X”,                           it<\/p>\n
     is     Government       policy that since the            lands        Khalwad,<\/p>\n
     Wadgi     are not Gairan lands, their distribution should<\/p>\n
     not      be      made       without   prior      permission           of      the<\/p>\n
     Government.           The     Government       waste     lands,        Gairan,<\/p>\n
     Gurcharan        lands are different lands and Khalwad lands<\/p>\n
     should     not be included or treated as Government waste<\/p>\n
     lands,     Gairan       or     Gurcharan lands         without        specific<\/p>\n
     directions       by the Government.            Reference was made               to<\/p>\n
                                                      ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>
\n                                            (   9    )<\/p>\n
     earlier G.R.              dated 16\/19 June, 1984.            It is also made<\/p>\n
     clear     that        Khalwad lands are very few and                    they      are<\/p>\n
     used     by     villagers for threshing.                It is also           stated<\/p>\n
     that     such        lands are useful for extension of                     Gavthan<\/p>\n
     and     for Gharkul schemes.              Said G.R.        further makes it<\/p>\n
     clear     that such Khalwad lands should be used only for<\/p>\n
     threshing        and        for drying fodder temporarily and                     any<\/p>\n
     encroachment thereon should be removed.\n<\/p>\n
     9.         This writ petition is under Article 226 of the<\/p>\n
     Constitution of India.\n<\/p>\n
     only     if     the\n                            ig             So this Court can grant relief\n\n                                case of the petitioner            strictly          falls\n                          \n<\/pre>\n
     within four corners of the policy of the Government as<\/p>\n
     enunciated           in     various       Government       Resolutions            and<\/p>\n
     Schemes.         G.R.        dated 12th September, 1979,                  produced<\/p>\n
     at     Exh.      “B”        speaks about Government              waste       lands,<\/p>\n
     Gairan        lands, revenue forest lands and various                          lands<\/p>\n
     incharge        of        Forest   Department.          G.R.        dated        18th<\/p>\n
     January,        1996,        has   made       it   very    clear        that      the<\/p>\n
     Government           did not intend to treat ‘Khalwad’ land                         as<\/p>\n
     Gairan        or Government waste lands.                So, the policy              of<\/p>\n
     the     Government           is very clear and unless it is                    shown<\/p>\n
     that     the Government has changed policy                       subsequently,<\/p>\n
     it     is not possible for this Court to direct that                              the<\/p>\n
     encroachment              by the petitioner should be regularized.\n<\/p>\n
                                                          ::: Downloaded on – 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span><\/p>\n
                                         (    10     )\n\n\n\n\n     Whether     particular           land   should       be     allowed           to    be\n\n     cultivated       is     a     matter     of policy.           Only       in        case\n\n\n\n\n                                                                                  \n     particular        policy          is    laid       down     and      there           is\n\n     discrimination         in     implementing the policy,                   in     such\n\n\n\n\n                                                         \n     event     only this Court can grant necessary relief.                               In\n\n     this     case G.R.          dated 18th January, 1996, produced by\n\n\n\n\n                                                        \n     the     A.G.P.        makes      it clear that         G.R.        dated           12th\n\n<\/pre>\n
     September, 1979, is not applicable to ‘Khalwadi’ lands<\/p>\n
     and     as such, case of the petitioner is not covered by<\/p>\n
     said     G.R.     dated 12th September, 1979 and he is                             not<\/p>\n
     entitled to get benefit of the same.<\/p>\n
\n                      \n     10.       In     view       of    above,     this      writ       petition          is\n\n     dismissed.        Interim         relief, if any, granted                 earlier\n\n     stands vacated.         Rule discharged.\n      \n   \n\n\n\n                                                  [P.R. BORKAR, J.]\n\n\n\n\n\n     snk\/2009\/JAN09\/wp3003.90\n\n\n\n\n\n                                                         ::: Downloaded on - 09\/06\/2013 14:18:48 :::<\/span>\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Bombay High Court Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 Bench: P. R. Borkar IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 3003 OF 1990 Ganpat s\/o. Ashruba Koli ]..Petitioners (since deceased) his L.Rs. 1) Narayan s\/o. Ganpat Koli, Age. 56 yrs., Occ. Service & Agri. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-229500","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bombay-high-court","category-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nGanpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-05-12T06:33:12+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-12T06:33:12+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1473,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Bombay High Court\",\"High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\",\"name\":\"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-05-12T06:33:12+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-05-12T06:33:12+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009","datePublished":"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-12T06:33:12+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009"},"wordCount":1473,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Bombay High Court","High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009","name":"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-02-02T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-05-12T06:33:12+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/ganpat-vs-the-state-of-maharashtra-on-3-february-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ganpat vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 February, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229500","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=229500"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/229500\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=229500"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=229500"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=229500"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}