SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 247154

HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SUMAN SHYAMHON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S. M. MODAK
PRAKASH MADHUKAR DESHPANDE (IN PERSON) – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS – Respondent
WP/12996/2024



2025:BHC-AS:57436-DB

Satish Sangar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.12996 OF 2024

Shri.Prakash Madhukar Deshpande

Digitally signed Age : 69 Years, Occupation : Business,

by SATISH

RAMCHANDRA

S R A A T M IS C H HANDRA SANGAR Residing at : 1, Manas Vihar, Plot No.40,

SANGAR Date:

2025.12.24

17:38:08 Sector 16, Chikhali Pradhikaran,

+0530

Raje Shivajinagar, Pune : 411 019. ...Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Maharashtra

(Through Hon’ble Pune District Collector,

Collector Office, Pune : 411 001).

2. Shri.Sanjay Balu Bhor – Talathi,

Wadgaon Bk, Talathi Office, Vithal Mandir

Premises, Vithalwadi, Pune : 411 051.

(Deleted as per Court’s order dated

18.09.2024)

3. Smt.Archana Niranjan Dhembre

Circle Officer, Wadgaon Bk, Talathi Office,

Vithal Mandir Premises, Vithalwadi,

Pune : 411 051.

(Deleted as per Court’s order dated

18.09.2024)

4. Shri.Kiran Survase

Tahasildar (Haveli), Shukrawar Peth,

Tahasildar Office, Pune : 411 002.

(Deleted as per Court’s order dated

18.09.2024)

5. Shri.Sanjay Aswale

Sub Divisional Officer (Haveli),

7, Nilgiri Bungalow, Ranicha Baug,

Behind Alpa Bachat Bhavan,

Pune : 411 001.

(Deleted as per Court’s order dated

18.09.2024)

…Respondents

Mr.Prakash Madhukar Deshpande – Petitioner in person.

Ms.Kavita N. Solunke, Addl.G.P. a/w Mr.A.A.Alaspurkar, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1 to 5 – State. CORAM: SUMAN SHYAM &

S. M. MODAK, JJ.

RESERVED ON: 3rd NOVEMBER 2025.

PRONOUNCED ON: 10th DECEMBER 2025.

JUDGMENT : (PER : S. M. MODAK, J.)

1. Heard the Petitioner-in-person and learned Addl.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 5. There are several mutation entries in respect of which, the Petitioner is seeking issuance of Writ of Mandamus to remove them from revenue record. There is further direction sought to insert a remark in 7X12 extract about “possession of Prakash Madhukar Deshpnade (present Petitioner) is protected by Hon’ble Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune vide order dated 15th November 2022 passed in Regular Civil Suit No.1727 of

1996”.

2. There is preliminary objection about maintainability of Petition on behalf of learned Addl.G.P. Her submission is that the mutation entries cannot be quashed and set aside in writ jurisdiction because there is alternate efficacious remedy available to the Petitioner as per the provsions of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 (In short, the “MLR Code, 1966”). There was also submission that one of the mutation entry No.3959 is already set aside by learned Revenue Minister as per the order dated 8th March

2018 passed in revisional jurisdiction.

3. Our attention is also invited to a suit bearing Regular Civil Suit No.1727 of 1996 filed by the Petitioner before the Civil Court, Pune wherein the Petitioner-Plaintiff has sought declaration of certain sale-deeds as illegal, null and void. These sale-deeds were executed in between Defendant Nos.1 to 5 and 11 to 16 as the vendors and the Defendant Nos.18,19 and deceased husband of Defendant No.17 as a purchasers.

4. For appreciating the controversy, we have gone through the record. It seems that the suit land was allotted to Madhukar Mahadev Deshpande, Modified portion being the father of the Petitioner as a project affected person. After his death, the suit land was mutated in the name of the present Petitioner. It seems that Petitioner was aggrieved by inserting the names of the other heirs of Mahadev on 7X12 extract. That is why he had initiated the revenue proceedings and some of the mutation entries relate to the said insertion of names. Apart from that, there are other mutation entries for which Writ of Mandamus is sought.

5. The Petitioner-in-person tried to convince us for entertaining this Writ Petition. However, we are not inclined to entertain the Petition for two reasons. If any person is aggrieved due to any mutation entries, there is a provision of Appeal as per the provisions of Section 247 of MLR Code, 1966. We also find that certain mutation entries are made on the basis of the sale-deeds which are the subject matter of pending suit.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top