The petitioner challenged the Tahsildar's rejection of his mutation application via a writ petition. The Court held that an alternate statutory remedy of appeal under Section 247 exists and disposed of the petition accordingly.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
WP-1301-12
Chandka
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 1301 OF 2012
Ramesh Krishna Nerkar ..Petitioner
versus
State of Maharashtra & Ors.
..Respondents
Mr. P. Sonawane and Mr. Sagar Kasar for Petitioner. Mrs. M. P. Thakur - Assistant Government Pleader for State - Respondents.
CORAM : D. D. SINHA AND SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, JJ.
23 February 2012
P.C. :
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the State.
whereby the application of the petitioner for mutating the name of the petitioner in the concerned register came to be rejected.
1/2
WP-1301-12
Chandka
(SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI, J.)
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the rejection of mutation application is maintainable in light of an alternate statutory remedy of appeal under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code,
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ramesh Krishna Nerkar
State of Maharashtra
D. D. SINHA
SMT. V. K. TAHILRAMANI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
