Correction in the consolidation scheme can be sought within a reasonable period of time, not beyond three years of finalization of the scheme.

JUDGMENT

Nitin B. Suryawanshi, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by the consent of the parties.

2. This petition impugns the order dated 24-08-2010, passed by the Hon'ble Minister (Revenue), Mantralaya, Mumbai, in Revision No.221/2017, thereby allowing revision filed by the respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

3. The petitioner and respondent No.5 are the real brothers i.e. sons of Tukaram Dhormare. The property original Survey No.79 is their ancestral property. The said land Survey No.79, in consolidation scheme was converted in two Gut numbers i.e. Gut Nos. 243 and 244. Land Gut No.244 has fallen to the share of respondent No.5, whereas the land Gut No.243 has come to the share of petitioner. Respondent No.3 is wife of respondent No.5. Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 are sons of respondent Nos. 5 and 3.

4. It is admitted position on record that the land original Survey No.79 is ancestral property of Tukaram Dhormare and after death of Tukaram there was partition between petitioner Sakharam and respondent No.5 Parshuram, on 03-12-1965. accordingly Mutation Entry No.271 was registered on 03-12-1965. as per the 7/12 extract respondent No.5 Parshuram and petitioner Sakharam are shown as owners and possessors of 8 annas share equally.

5. The petitioner filed application on 31-01-2004 seeking correction in the consolidation scheme. according to the petitioner land Gut Nos. 243 and 244 were partitioned by East-West boundary and the petitioner and respondent No.5 are in possession of their respective shares. However, in consolidation scheme the land is shown to be divided by North-South boundary. Hence, necessary correction be made in the consolidation scheme showing partition of the land by East-West boundary.

6. according to the petitioner, pursuant to the application the Taluka Inspector of Land Records issued notices to the petitioner and respondents for remaining present for inquiry, spot inspection and verification of actual possession of the parties over the suit property. Notices were duly served on the respondents. Inquiry was made, spot inspection was conducted and statements of occupants of the lands were recorded on 06-01-2007. Respondent Nos. 5 and 6 signed the statements recorded by the Taluka Inspector of Land Records and consented for correction in the record. By notice dated 08-01-2007 the Taluka Inspector of Land Records called objections of all the parties in respect of correction to be made. The said notice was also served on all the parties. Thereafter, on 02-04-2007 the Taluka Inspector of Land Records, Sillod submitted a detail report to the District Superintendent of Land Records, aurangabad, mentioning that all the holders of land Gut Nos. 243 and 244 have given consent for carrying out correction in the record and because of the said correction no change would occur in the total number of holders, Gut numbers and their areas. Respondent No.2 thereafter approved the correction. On 27-06-2007, notice of correction was published by affixing the notice on the notice board of the village Panchayat. The Panchanama to that effect was carried out. Respondent No.4 has signed the panchanama as a Panch. Since nobody objected to the correction, the correction was sanctioned by respondent No.2 by order dated 24-08-2010. The correction was acted upon and nobody objected to it for several years.

7. after seven years the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed revision before the Hon'ble Minister challenging the correction. along with the revision delay condonation application was filed. The petitioner opposed the application as well as the revision. However, the Hon'ble Minister simultaneously condoned the delay and allowed the revision. Hence, the present petition.

8. Heard the learned advocate for petitioner, learned advocate for respondent Nos. 3 to 6 and the learned assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 State.

9. The learned advocate for petitioner strenuously submits that in partition, shares of the petitioner and