JUDGMENT : 

1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned Advocate for Petitioner, Mrs. Nimbalkar, learned AGP for Respondent – State and Mr. Railkar, learned Advocate of Respondent No. 5.

2. Present Petition challenges Order dated 11.11.2020 passed by Respondent No.1 – State directing Petitioner to deposit 100% of Ready Reckoner valuation for regularisation of change of user to Non – Agricultural purpose and 75% of Ready Reckoner valuation for regularization of conveyance as transfer premium on account of Petitioner’s purchase of two parcels of land owned by Petitioner bearing CTS Nos. 456/1 and 456/2 admeasuring 249.6 square meters and 111.2 square meters respectively (for short “subject lands”). The impugned order is appended at Exhibit “A” page No. 23 to the Petition.

3. Brief facts relevant for adjudication of present Petition are as under:-

3.1. One Savlaram Trimbak Natu was perpetual lessee in respect of one parcel of land out of subject lands bearing CTS No.456/1 admeasuring 249.6 square meters which was classified under Tenure “D” during pre – independence era. On 02.05.1934, after the demise of Savlaram Trimbak Natu, name of his wife one Smt. Sitabai Savlaram Trimbak was mutated in revenue record. On 14.06.1950 and 08.06.1953 Sitabai sold some part of subject lands vide registered Sale Deeds to one Dwarkabai Vishwanath Joshi and one Ramabai Atmaram Athavane. After their demise, names of their legal heirs were mutated in revenue record. Petitioner executed registered Sale Deed dated 10.09.2013 and purchased these parcel of subject lands from the legal heirs of Dwarkabai Vishwanath Joshi and Ramabai Atmaram Athavane.

3.2. Shridhar Trimbak Natu was also the perpetual lessee in respect of one more parcel of land bearing CTS No.456/2 admeasuring 111.2 square meters which was also classified under Tenure “D” during the pre – independence era. On 30.05.1931, Shridhar Trimbak Natu transferred this parcel of land to one Purushottam Narayan Gone. On 19.11.1947, this land was further transferred to one Gopal Bhikaji Phatak and later transferred to one Sushilabai Vishnu Kulkarni. On 17.04.1997, Sushilabai expired and her heirs were brought on record. On 10.09.2013, Petitioner purchased this parcel of land vide registered Sale Deed from heirs of Sushilabai.

3.3. Thus Petitioner purchased the subject lands.

3.4. Petitioner obtained requisite permissions from Respondent No.2 – Corporation to develop the subject lands. In 2021, after the development was complete, Respondent No.2 issued Part Occupancy Certificate in respect of Petitioner’s newly developed multi – storey buildings. Private Respondent No.5 addressed complaint dated 03.11.2017 to Tehsildar, Panvel (for short “Respondent No.4”) after which Petitioner filed application dated 20.11.2017 before Respondent No. 4 seeking change of tenure from “D” to “A” with respect to subject lands. Respondent No.4 forwarded his report along with Petitioner’s application seeking change of tenure to District Collector (for short “Respondent No.3”) who addressed letter dated 03.03.2018 to Petitioner stating that in view of Government Resolution dated 27.08.2019, the application cannot be allowed. Private Respondent No.5 addressed further complaints dated 07.06.2018, 23.10.2018 and 14.11.2018 to Respondent No.3 seeking action against Petitioner for violation of terms of original lease under which subject lands were leased to original occupants. Petitioner filed its reply subsequent to which Respondent No.3 conducted hearing and passed order dated 26.03.2019 forwarding Petitioner’s application to State Government seeking appropriate orders and directions. Being aggrieved by the twin orders dated 03.03.2018 and 26.03.2019 both passed by Respondent No.3, Petitioner filed Revision Application No.243 of 2020 before Divisional Commissioner, Konkan Division who passed order dated 30.09.2020, and held that Petitioner’s application cannot be considered since the same it was before Respondent No.1 – Minister.

3.5. Being aggrieved