( 1 ) MR. H. M. Prachchhak, learned Advocate waives service of Rule for respondent No. 4. Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 being quasi- judicial authorities, no notice is required to be issued to them. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the petition has been taken up for final disposal and is being disposed of by this judgment.

( 2 ) WHAT is challenged in this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution is the judgment and order dated 28-3-2002 passed by the Principal Secretary, revenue Department (Appeals) of the State Government dismissing the petitioners revision application under Sec. 135l (2) of the Bombay Land Revenue Code (the Code or the B. L. R. Code for brevity) read with Rule 108 (6a) of the Bombay land Revenue Rules, 1921 (the Rules or the B. L. R. Rules, for brevity ).

( 3 ) THE facts leading to filing of the petition are as under :-3. 1 The dispute between the parties is about land admeasuring Acres 4, 9 Gunthas in Survey No. 128 and land admeasuring Acres 4, 2 Gunthas in survey No. 124 of the City of Rajkot. Both the parcels of land are hereinafter referred to as "the land" or "the land in question". The revenue record indicated that prior t