Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J
Anandrao Dinkar Pachundkar – Appellant
Versus
Hon’ble Minister For Revenue & Forest Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
A. The Challenge
1) These two Petitions are filed by the Petitioner challenging the orders dated 17 October 2023 passed by the Hon’ble Minister (Revenue) dismissing the Revision Applications filed by him. Petitioner had initiated proceedings in the form of appeals before the District Superintendent of Land Records essentially seeking inclusion of the lands bearing Grampanchayat old Milkat No. 34A(new No.622/1) and 35(new No.622/2) in the city survey by conducting a fresh survey enquiry under the provisions of Section 20(2) Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (the Code) and to record his name in the revenue records by carrying out necessary corrections in city survey records and the map. The said proceedings initiated by the Petitioner have ultimately been rejected by virtue of impugned orders dated 17 October 2023 passed by the Hon’ble Minister.
2) In respect of house property bearing Grampanchayat Old Milkat No.35 (revised No.622/2) the Petitioner has lost throughout the District Superintendent of Land Records (DSLR), Deputy Director of Land Records (DDLR) and Hon’ble Minister and the orders passed in those proceedings are subject matter of challenge in Writ Petition No.20
The court upheld the dismissal of petitions due to dubious entries in Grampanchayat records, emphasizing the need for civil suits to establish title rather than relying on administrative decisions.
The court ruled that claims based on dubious entries in Grampanchayat Registers cannot be upheld, emphasizing the need for a civil suit to establish title rather than relying on revenue proceedings.
it was impermissible to Collector to have taken the entries nos.2208 and 2209 in suo motu revision after a period of almost close to five years. Therefore, the exercise of power by the Collector in t....
The finality of judgments and decrees, and the ineffectiveness of attempts to challenge them, was a central legal principle established in the judgment.
The court affirmed that a revision petition under the ROR Act can be filed without a time limit, emphasizing the need for a fresh enquiry into land ownership claims, especially in cases of alleged fr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to adhere to principles of natural justice and the prescribed method and procedure when exercising statutory powers.
Entries in revenue records made fraudulently lack legal validity, and administrative authorities must provide reasons for their decisions to ensure justice.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
