Archana Gokul Kothawate vs Deputy Director Of Land Records ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 9599 Bom

                                      1                 WP NO.1570 OF 2014


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        WRIT PETITION NO.1570 OF 2014


           Smt. Archana Gokul Kathawate,
           Age 41 yrs, Occ: Household,
           R/o. Jadhavgalli, Vaijapur,
           Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.

                                                         ...Petitioner
                   Versus

  1.       Deputy Director of Land Records,
           Aurangabad.

  2.       The Superintendent of Land Records,
           Aurangabad.

  3.       Taluka Inspector of Land Records,
           Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.

  4.       Smt. Gaurabai Raju Shetti,
           Age Major, Occu: Household,
           R/o. Murari Park, Vaijapur,
           Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.

                                               ...Respondents
                             ...
  Mr. Chandrakant R.Thorat, Advocate, for the petitioner.
  Ms. S.S.Raut, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent
  nos. 1 to 3.

  Mr. S.A.Deshmukh, Advocate, Mr. S.S.Kulkarni, Advocate, for
  respondent no.4.
                           ...

                               CORAM: SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.

DATE : December 13th, 2017

***

2 WP NO.1570 OF 2014

ORAL JUDGMENT:

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties finally by

consent.

3. Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner Shri

Chandrakant R.Thorat points out that appeal filed against order

dated 23rd of October, 2013, in the proceedings bearing

No.N.BHU/APPEAL/S.R.2081/2013, has been decided without

issuing notice and / or hearing the petitioner. Learned

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is

aggrieved by order dated 23rd October, 2013 and, as such, for

the purported reason of alternate remedy, appeal has been

disposed of without hearing the petitioner. Learned Counsel

states that had an opportunity come his way, may be he would

have been able to point out that appeal could have been

decided without getting swayed by alternate remedy.

4. Learned Counsel for respondent No.4 Mr.

S.A.Deshmukh, holding for Mr.S.S.Kulkarni, submits that may

be ostensibly, the impugned order has been passed without

3 WP NO.1570 OF 2014

hearing the parties, yet the position in law is unlikely to change

that an alternate remedy is available. Learned Counsel Shri

Chandrakant R.Thorat, however, submits that yet he would

desire to have hearing before the appellate authority in order to

convince that an appeal can be maintainable.

5. In the circumstances, it would be expedient that an

opportunity be given to the parties to address themselves on

the appeal with respect to its maintainability. As such, the

impugned order is set aside, remanding the matter to the

Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad, restoring the

Appeal filed by the petitioner.

Parties agree to appear before the Deputy Director of

Land Records, Aurangabad, on 22nd of January, 2018, doing

away with issuance of notice to parties by Deputy Director of

Land Records, for hearing.

(SUNIL P. DESHMUKH) JUDGE ...

AGP/1570-14wp