Minister has jurisdiction under Section 35 of the Act to entertain appeals, even after delays, when assessing legality of prior orders; remands for inquiries on land titles following consolidation must be properly executed.

JUDGMENT :

SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition is directed against the order of the learned Minister passed on 09.09.2019, setting aside order of 09.02.2011 passed by District Superintendent of Land Record, and remitting the matter for fresh enquiry to the said authority. Petitioner and the Respondent No.5 are litigating over ownership of eight acres which is wrongly shown in the record of right after implementation of consolidation scheme.

3. Petitioner claims that he was owner of survey no.13/A measuring 10 acres and 7 gunthas situated at Omerga (Chivri) Tq. Tuljapur, District Osmanabad. After consolidation scheme, the said land is numbered as gat no.17 measuring 76R thereby reducing it’s area by 8 acre. The Respondent No.5 was the owner of Survey no.13/B total admeasuring 15 Acres which is given Gat No. 19. It’s a case of the petitioner that Gat no. 19 is formulated by consolidating Survey nos. 8/2,8/3 and 8/9/3 and making it upto 23 Acres and 20 gunthas. Due to the mistake, area of 8 acres belonging to the petitioner which was part of gat No. 17 is wrongly added to the area of gat No. 19. Gut No. 17 is reduced to 76R from 10 acres and 7 gunthas (4 Hectare). This was a cause of action for petitioner to approach civil court.

4. Petitioner had filed R.C.S No. 105 of 1995 for declaration and injunction in respect of disputed 8 acre which was part of his gat no.17 and wrongly added to gat no.19 after consolidation. After recording evidence of the contesting parties, suit was decreed on 26.02.2001. Being aggrieved R.C.A No. 66 of 2001 was preferred. It was allowed partly remanding the matter to the trial court for referring issue to the competent authority under ‘The MAHARASHTRA PREVENTION OF FRAGMENTATION AND CONSOLIDATION OF HOLDINGS ACT , 1947’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ for the sake of brevity and convenience) vide judgment dated 18.07.2003.

5. After remand, Learned Trial Judge referred following issue to the competent authority as per Section 36 (B) of the Act. “Whether the plaintiff proves that this land has been converted into block No. 17 and he is owner of the area of 10 acres instead of area of 76R on the basis of old record of Survey number ?

6. After referring the issue, Respondent No.4/Superintendent of land record passed order dated 09.02.2011. Thereafter, trial court again decreed R.C.S No.105 of 1995 on 30.04.2015 which was assailed by the Respondent No.5 in R.C.A No.119 of 2015. It was dismissed on 21.01.2019. Questioning the decrees passed by the courts below, Respondent No.5 has preferred Second Appeal No.303 of 2019 which is tagged alongwith the present petition.

7. The Respondent No.5 approached Learned Minister on 03.01.2019, taking exception to the order dated 09.02.2011 passed by District Superintendent of Land Record along with application for condonation of delay. In pursuance of the notice, petitioner appeared before learned Minister. Delay was condoned and simultaneously order dated 09.02.2011 was recorded to be passed without considering consolidation record and contrary to the issue referred. Vide judgment