JUDGMENT :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties, matter is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage.

THE CHALLENGE

2. These two petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging common judgment and order dated 21.09.2021 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai, Camp at Aurangabad in Revision Nos.30/B/2015/A and 31/B/2015/A. By that judgment and order, the Tribunal has upheld the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Aurangabad dated 02.02.2015 setting aside the order passed by the Tahsildar, Paithan dated 09.01.2014. By order dated 09.01.2014 the Tahsildar held petitioners to be tenants in respect of lands, determined the price at Rs.5000/- under Section 38(4) of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (for short ‘the Act, 1950) and upon payment of the said amount, a direction was issued for issuance of purchase certificate under the provisions of Section 38(5) and 38(6) of the Act, 1950.

FACTUAL MATRIX

3. The case of petitioners as pleaded is that their grandfather late Dagdu Bhai Raheem Bhai was a protected tenant in respect of lands bearing survey no.25 admeasuring 17 acre 9 gunthas as well as survey no.26 adme