Judgment : Oral Judgment :- This is a writ petition filed by original encroacher - Ganpat Ashruba Koli for regularization of encroachment made by him in view of Government Resolution dated 12th September, 1979, produced at Exh. "B" with the petition and to give directions to the respondents not to dispossess the petitioner from Survey No.46 (Gat No.220) of village Vasadi, Tal. Kannad and to quash and set aside order dated 03.02.1988 whereby the petitioner was informed that his encroachment cannot be regularized as the land is ’Khalwadi’ (land used for threshing harvest). 2. Thefacts giving rise to this petition may be stated as below:- “Original petitioner Ganpat Ashruba Koli was resident of village Vasadi, Tal. Kannad, Dist. Aurangbad. He claimed that he had been in possession of Survey No.46 (Block No.220) since the time of his forefather. They have been cultivating the land. Since they have made encroachment over the said Government land, as per G.R. dated 12.09.1979, he is entitled to have the encroachment regularized. He made applications to that effect to respondent authorities. However, respondent authorities informed by letter dated 03.02.1988 (copy of which is produced at Exh."Z-1") that since the land was ’Khalwadi’, G.R. dated 12th September, 1979, is not applicable and his prayer cannot be granted. At the same time the respondents have also taken steps for taking back removal of encroachment and gave notice of eviction. In the circumstances, the petitioner approached this Court for directions to the respondents to regularize the encroachment and not disturbing his possession. .3. Respondent Nos.4 and 6 have appeared and filed affidavit-in-reply. They stated that the land in question is ’Khalwadi’ and as such the G.R. in question is not applicable. The encroachment cannot be regularized under the policy of the Government. .The respondents relied upon G.R. dated 18th January, 1996, copy of which is taken on record and marked "R-X" for identification. It is also stated that though Grampanchayat has passed resolution and recommended case of the petitioner for regularisation, the property is belonging to the Government. The Grampanchayat is not possessor and/or owner of the property and cannot have any say in disposal of the property. It is also stated that the petitioner had made encroachment and cultivating land unauthorizedly since 1970-71 and not prior to that. 4. The Grampanchayat is not possessor and/or owner of the property and cannot have any say in disposal of the property. It is also stated that the petitioner had made encroachment and cultivating land unauthorizedly since 1970-71 and not prior to that. 4. At Exh."A" the petitioner produced his caste certificate to show that he belonged to Koli Mahadev a Scheduled Tribe. Exh. "B" is the G.R. in question and it relates to regularization of the encroachment made for cultivation on the Government waste lands, Gairan lands, revenue forest lands and forest lands incharge of the Forest Department. The criteria for regularization were laid down. The date relevant for regularization is 31.03.1978. By the said G.R. in question it was made clear that all those encroachments made in between 01.04.1972 to 31.03.1978 irrespective of whether the encroachment was subsisting on 31.03.1978 should be regularized. Various terms and conditions for regularization are also laid down. The extent to which regularization can be made is also laid down in paragraph 7. The G.R. also lays down that the regularization can be up to a particular area of land and it is referred to as ’Standard Area’. At Exh. "C" there is a letter dated 30.12.1961 informing the original petitioner Ganpat Koli in response to his application dated 112.1961 and 112.1961 addressed to the Dy. Collector, Vaijapur, that this land was ’Khalwadi’ land and same cannot be given for cultivation. So, it is clear that in 1961-1962 the petitioner had applied for getting the land from ’Khalwadi’ for cultivation. At Exh. "D" there is a letter dated 16.08.1962 giving a sort of certificate that Survey No.46 known as ’Khalwadi’ in record was cultivable and threshing of corn was never done in that land as it was away from village locality. So, appropriate action as per law may be taken. At Exh."H" there is a copy of resolution dated 210.1965 in which the Grampanchayat stated in response to query from superiors that it was informed that the Government was considering granting land from Survey No.46 ’Khalwadi’ to petitioner Ganpat Ashru for cultivation. The land is 18 acres.So, the Grampanchayat resolved that it might be given to two families. It is made clear that the land was not required by the Grampanchayat and it had no objection if it was brought under cultivation. 5. Then there is some correspondence and reminders. The land is 18 acres.So, the Grampanchayat resolved that it might be given to two families. It is made clear that the land was not required by the Grampanchayat and it had no objection if it was brought under cultivation. 5. Then there is some correspondence and reminders. At Exh."K" there is panchanama drawn on 06.06.1970, which shows that the petitioner Ganpat Ashruba had been in possession of the property for previous four years. He had no documents and permission of the Government. It is also stated that there were 15 trees of Moha, which were missing at the time of panchanama. Petitioner -Ganpat Ashroba was informed not to cultivate the land without permission of the Tahsil office. At Exh. "L" there is a letter dated 09.03.1972, whereby the Tahsildar, Kannad, called upon petitioner Ganpat Ashruba Koli to show cause why action should not be taken against him as he had illegally sown Bajra in Survey no.42, which was encroachment. Similar notice for removal of encroachment dated 07.08.1972 is produced at Exh. "M". Another notice for removal of the encroachment within 3 days and for furnishing explanation was given on 30.06.1975. Its copy is at Exh."N". So, it is clear that 1970 onwards the petitioner had been in possession of the land in question and he was cultivating it. 6. At Exh."P" there is a public notification calling upon objections to granting land in question to the petitioner. It was issued by the Tahsildar Office. Its covering letter is at Exh. "O". So, it is clear that some of the respondents had taken steps for regularization and some procedure was followed. At Exh."T" there is a letter dated 210.1986 sent by Talathi to the Tahsildar regarding information about income taken by the petitioner from the land. At Exh. "V" there is letter dated 21.01.1988 by the Collector calling some information regarding regularization. V.F. 7/12 extracts are produced at Exh."X" by the petitioner. They show that the land is ’Khalwadi’ and the name of the petitioner was shown as cultivator from 1970-71 onwards. It is mentioned that there is encroachment made by the petitioner. At Exh."Y" there is application made by some homeless persons to the Collector requesting that land provided for Gharkul Yojna (scheme for providing housing to the homeless persons) may be shifted from Block No.220 as the same was not convenient. It is mentioned that there is encroachment made by the petitioner. At Exh."Y" there is application made by some homeless persons to the Collector requesting that land provided for Gharkul Yojna (scheme for providing housing to the homeless persons) may be shifted from Block No.220 as the same was not convenient. At Exh."Z-1", there is letter in question dated 03.02.1988, which is impugned. It is information by the S.D.O., Vaijapur to the Collector that since the land was ’Khalwadi’, as per G.R. dated 03.08.1982, the encroachment cannot be regularized and it is this action which is challenged. 7. Learned Advocate Shri N.N. Shinde for the petitioner has taken me through all above documents and argued that the petitioner belongs to Nomadic Tribe; he is landless person; he is in possession of atleast from 1970-71 onwards as per revenue record. The Grampanchayat has passed resolution for granting land for cultivation to the petitioner and under the circumstances the writ petition may be allowed. .8. Mrs. Khekale, learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents argued that as per copy of G.R. dated 18th January, 1996, which is marked as Exh."R-X", it is Government policy that since the lands Khalwad, Wadgi are not Gairan lands, their distribution should not be made without prior permission of the Government. The Government waste lands, Gairan, Gurcharan lands are different lands and Khalwad lands should not be included or treated as Government waste lands, Gairan or .Gurcharan lands without specific directions by the Government. Reference was made to earlier G.R. dated 16/19 June, 1984. It is also made clear that Khalwad lands are very few and they are used by villagers for threshing. It is also stated that such lands are useful for extension of Gavthan and for Gharkul schemes. Said G.R. further makes it clear that such Khalwad lands should be used only for threshing and for drying fodder temporarily and any encroachment thereon should be removed. .9. This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. So this Court can grant relief only if the case of the petitioner strictly falls within four corners of the policy of the Government as enunciated in various Government Resolutions and Schemes. G.R. dated 12th September, 1979, produced at Exh. "B" speaks about Government waste lands, Gairan lands, revenue forest lands and various lands incharge of Forest Department. So this Court can grant relief only if the case of the petitioner strictly falls within four corners of the policy of the Government as enunciated in various Government Resolutions and Schemes. G.R. dated 12th September, 1979, produced at Exh. "B" speaks about Government waste lands, Gairan lands, revenue forest lands and various lands incharge of Forest Department. G.R. dated 18th January, 1996, has made it very clear that the Government did not intend to treat ’Khalwad’ land as Gairan or Government waste lands. So, the policy of the Government is very clear and unless it is shown that the Government has changed policy subsequently, it is not possible for this Court to direct that the encroachment by the petitioner should be regularized. .Whether particular land should be allowed to be cultivated is a matter of policy. Only in case particular policy is laid down and there is discrimination in implementing the policy, in such event only this Court can grant necessary relief. In this case G.R. dated 18th January, 1996, produced by the A.G.P. makes it clear that G.R. dated 12th September, 1979, is not applicable to ’Khalwadi’ lands and as such, case of the petitioner is not covered by said G.R. dated 12th September, 1979 and he is not entitled to get benefit of the same. 10. In view of above, this writ petition is dismissed. Interim relief, if any, granted earlier stands vacated. Rule discharged.