Rajesh Radhyshyamji Agrawal vs State Of Maha., Through Its ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 8827 Bom

                                                                   1               wp6150of2015.odt


                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT 
                                BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
                                    Writ Petition No. 6150 of 2015 

              PETITIONER                :-            Rajesh Radhyashyamji Agrawal,
                                                      Age 50 years, 
                                                      Occ. Business, R/o Chota Bazar,
                                                      Paratwada, Tq. Achalpur, 
                                                      Dist. Amravati.

                                                        Versus


              RESPONDENTS :-                   1.  State of Maharashtra, Through its 
                                                   Secretary, Revenue Department, 
                                                   Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

                                               2. The Sub-Divisional Officer, 
                                                  Achalpur, Tq. Achalpur, Dist. Amravati 
                                                  near Civil Court, Achalpur.

                                               3. The Deputy Superintendent of Land 
                                                  Records Achalpur, Dist. Amravati. 

                

              Shri G.G. Bade, Advocate for Petitioner.
              Shri M.K.Pathan, A.G.P. for State/Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. 


                                         
                                          CORAM: R.K.DESHPANDE &
                                                       M.G.GIRATKAR, JJ
                                          DATED: 
                                                    17    NOVEMBER
                                                       th
                                                                   ,  201
                                                                         7
                                                                           . 

Judgment (Per R.K.Deshpande, J)

Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

2 wp6150of2015.odt

consent of the learned counsels appearing for the parties.

2. In Writ Petition No. 1023/2012 [Indrakumar

Harivallabh Mundra v/s State of Maharashtra] decided on

12/06/2012, this Court passed the following order :

" The request of the petitioner is to register the mutation and, therefore, he applied to the Deputy Superintendent of the Land Records, Gondia. The said authority has directed the petitioner to approach the Collector, Gondia and produce the No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the said Collector.

The request of the petitioner is simplicitor to mutate his name in the land records. At this stage, it is difficult to understand as to how the authorities under the Land Revenue Code are concerned with the rights of the parties like the petitioner. The matter of title to the properties stands apart and can be dealt with and decided by the Competent Courts. In these circumstances, it is difficult to sustain the directions of the Dy. Superintendent of Land Records, Gondia. Let this Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Gondia consider the request of the petitioner for effecting mutation in the revenue records in accordance with rules and without insisting on production of a No Objection Certificate from Collector, Gondia. Let this be done within a period of two weeks from today.

Stand over to 27th June, 2012.

Steno copy granted.".

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

similar direction can be issued in this petition also, keeping the

3 wp6150of2015.odt

question of challenge to the title open, to be agitated before the

competent Court.

4. In view of above, the order dated 27/8/2015, passed

by the Deputy Superintendent of Land Record, Achalpur, is hereby

quashed and set aside. If the document of title over the suit

property is produced, the mutation in respect of the said property

be carried out in the name of petitioner, and if there is any

objection by any other party, the same can be dealt with as per the

procedure prescribed under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code,

1966.

5. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to

costs.

                                          JUDGE                              JUDGE           


              nandurkar