DESHMUKH J.- This writ petition arising out of the proceedings under the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Vidarbha Tenancy Act) has been referred by a learned single Judge of this Court (Masodkar J.) to a Division Bench as the learned Judge found that there was a conflict of decisions between his own earlier judgment Madhukar v. Gajanan1, and a judgment delivered by another learned single Judge of this Court (Padhye J.) in Dattatraya v. Rama2.

2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides and after going through the provisions of the Vidarbha Tenancy Act and the judgments of the Supreme Court as also the Division Bench of this Court, directly and indirectly dealing with these provisions or similar provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Bombay Tenancy Act), we are satisfied that the reference need not have been made. This is a litigation which has commenced with an application under section 36(1) of the Vidarbha Tenrtncy Act by the respondent No.1 Hawadya, who called himself tenant of the land in question. The facts alleged, and which are found by