NDLI: Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Constitution of India Auction Scope of interference Art.22
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Act(s) Referred	Constitution of India
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Constitution of India: Art.226 – Scope of interference – Auction of sand blocks of river – Appellant was highest bidder and he deposited the entire auction amount but he was not put in possession – He filed representation for refund of auction amount – The Panchnama prepared by the Circle Officer exhibited that neither possession of the sand block was given to the appellant nor excavation of sand was done from the said sand block – The said position was reiterated by the Tehsildar, Sub-Divisional Officer and also Collector – However, in the transit the file was lost and as such appellant was not granted possession of sand block nor refund was made to him – State Government also rejected his prayer for refund – Appellant filed writ petition – High Court refused to entertain the petition on the ground that it involved question of facts – On appeal, held: Normally, when a petition involves disputed questions of fact and law, High Court would be slow in entertaining the petition under Art.226 of the Constitution – However, it is a rule of self- restraint and not a hard and fast rule – Even if there are disputed questions of fact which fall for consideration but if they do not require elaborate evidence to be adduced, the High Court is not precluded from entertaining Art.226 petition – However, such a plenary power has to be exercised by the High Court in exceptional circumstances – In this case, undisputedly, the appellant was highest bidder for the sand block in question and made deposit of full auction amount – Subsequently after all the authorities found that neither the possession of the sand block was handed over to him nor the excavation of sand from the said sand block was done, at the instance of the Collector, the file for grant of refund was being processed – However, appellant was denied the refund on the ground that the file in transit was misplaced – It could thus be seen that the denial on the part of the respondents to refund the amount to appellant was unreasonable – The action of authorities, in denying refund of the amount of the appellant, when they themselves had failed to give possession of the sand block and as a result of which the appellant could not excavate the sand, would smack of arbitrariness – In this premise, High Court was not justified in relegating the appellant to file a suit – Respondents directed to refund the entire amount received from the appellant along with interest. Government litigant: The State should act as a model litigant.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai Honble Mr. Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant
Neutral Citation	2020 INSC 183
Petitioner	Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil
Respondent	The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.
SCR	[2020] 3 S.C.R. 789
Judgement Date	2020-02-14
Case Number	1600

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Himachal Pradesh Administration Vs. Shri Om Prakash

State of Maharashtra Vs. Digambar

Habeeb Mohammad Vs. The State of Hyderabad.

State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Prakash Prahlad Patil & Ors.

K. H. Phadnis Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Y. B. Patil and Ors. Vs. Y. L. Patil

Shivagonda Subraigonda Patil and Ors. Vs. Rudragonda Bhimagonda Patil and Anr.

Dinkar Anna Patil and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

Himachal Pradesh Administration Vs. Shri Om Prakash

State of Maharashtra Vs. Digambar

Habeeb Mohammad Vs. The State of Hyderabad.

State of Maharashtra & Ors. Vs. Prakash Prahlad Patil & Ors.

K. H. Phadnis Vs. State of Maharashtra

Ramchandra Ganpat Shinde and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Y. B. Patil and Ors. Vs. Y. L. Patil

Shivagonda Subraigonda Patil and Ors. Vs. Rudragonda Bhimagonda Patil and Anr.

Dinkar Anna Patil and Ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Popatrao Vyankatrao Patil Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.