JUDGMENT - KHANDEPARKAR R.M.S., J.:---Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. Perused the records. Rule. By consent, the rule made returnable forthwith.

2. The petitioners challenge order dated 6-8-2002 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune, allowing the revision application at the instance of the respondent against the order of Additional Collector, Kolhapur dated 24-8-2001. Additional Collector, Kolhapur by the said order dated 24-8-2001 had set aside the order dated 19-2-2001 of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Gadhinglaj. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Gagdinglaj, in turn by his order dated 19-2-2002 while allowing the appeal of the respondent had set aside the order dated 15-12-1998 passed by the Tahsildar Chandgad in RTS No. 26 of 1998. The Tahsildar of Chandgad has allowed the application filed by the petitioners for necessary mutation of entry in favour of the petitioners claiming right of occupation to the suit premises based on the registered Sale Deed dated 15-7-1998. The said order was passed while exercising the powers under the provisions of law contained in section 149 r/w section 150 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (hereinafter called "the said Code").

3. Though the impugned order is sought to be challenged on various grounds, it is not necessary to consider all those grounds and suffice to refer to the ground regarding the scope of powers of the Revenue Officers under section 149 r/w section 150 of the said Code and the contention of the petitioners about patently illegal exercise of the powers by the revenue authorities and more particularly by Sub-Divisional Officer, Gadhinglaj while allowing the appeal against the order of the Tahsildar as well as by the Additional Commissioner, Pune, while confirming the said order of the Sub-Divisional Officer.

4. Section 149 of the said Code provides that any person acquiring by succession, survivorship, inheritance, partition, purchase, mortgage, gift, lease or otherwise, any right as holder, occupant, owner, mortgagee, land, Government lessee or tenant of the land situated in any part of the State or assignee of the rent or revenue thereof, shall report orally or in writing his acquisition of such right to the Talathi within three months from the date of such acquisition and the Talathi shall at once give a written acknowledgment of the receipt of such report to the person making it, provided that, where the person acquiring the right is a minor or otherwise disqualified, his guardian or other person having charge of his property shall make the report to the Talathi. However, any person acquiring a right with the permission of the Collector or by virtue of a registered document is exempted from the obligation to make any such report to the Talathi. Apparently in case of any right being acquired in any immovable property, the person who has acquired such right has to report the said fact to the Talathi either orally or in writing and moment such report is made the Talathi is enjoined to acknowledge the receipt of such report to the person making it. Undoubtedly person acquiring the right by virtue of any registered document is exempted from the obligation of making such report to the Talathi. This is apparently on account of a duty cast upon the registering authority to intimate to the Talathi the fact of such acquisition of right in favour of any person in relation to a property by virtue of a registered document. The provision regarding such obligation of the registering authorities is to be found in section 154 of the said Code.

5. Section 150(1) of the said Code provides that the Talathi shall enter in a register of mutations every report made to him under section 149 or any intimation or acquisition or transfer under section 154 from any Collector or the registering authority. Sub-section (2) of section 150 provides that whenever a Talathi makes an entry in the register of mutations, he shall at the same time post up a complete copy of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document