Quashed

Devram Babu Avhad and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC24 Apr 2013WP/3142/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad addressed the maintainability of a revision filed before the Additional Commissioner against an order under Section 23 of the Mamlatdar's Court Act, deemed non-maintainable due to statutory finality.

What did the court decide?

The order passed by the Additional Commissioner in revision is quashed and set aside.

Devram Babu Avhad and Another Vs the State of… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

1 wp 3142.13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 3142 OF 2013

¶4

Devram S/o Babu Avhad, Age : 53 Years, Occu. : Agril.,

¶5

Bhagwan S/o Babu Avhad, Age : 42 Years, Occu. : Agril.,

¶6

Both R/o Majle Chincholi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar. .. Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

¶9

The Additional Divisional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik.

¶10

The Sub Divisional Officer, Nagar Division, Nagar, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

¶11

The Tahsildar, Ahmednagar, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar.

¶12

2 wp 3142.13

¶13

Maroti S/o Rabhaji Avhad, Age : 55 Years, Occu. : Agril.,

¶14

Karbhari S/o rabhaji Avhad, Age : 53 Years, Occu. : Agril.,

¶15

Gorkshnath S/o Rabhaji Avhad, Age : 51 Years, Occu. : Agril.,

¶16

Respondent Nos. 5 to 7 all R/o Village Majle Chincholi, Tq. & Dist. Ahmednagar. .. Respondents

¶17

Shri N. B. Narwade, Advocate for Petitioners.

¶18

Smt. Y. M. Kshirsagar, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Shri K. D. Bade Patil, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5.

¶19

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 24TH APRIL, 2013.

¶20

ORAL JUDGMENT :

¶21

. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing.

¶22

An order passed by the Additional Commissioner in revision is assailed.

¶23

Shri Narwade, the learned counsel for petitioners submits

¶24

3 wp 3142.13

¶25

that the proceedings U/Sec. 5(2) of the Mamlatdar's Court Act were initiated by present respondents. The said proceedings were allowed. The petitioners had challenged the said judgment U/Sec. 23 of the Mamlatdar's Court Act in revision before the Sub Divisional Officer. The said revision was allowed. Against the said judgment passed by the Sub Divisional Officer in revision the present respondents filed further revision before the Commissioner which was not maintainable. The provisions of the Mamlatdar's Court Act makes the decision given by the S. D. O. final. According to the learned counsel said judgment is without jurisdiction.

¶26

Shri Bade Patil, the learned counsel supports the order.

¶27

Under the provisions of Sec. 23 of the Mamlatdar's Court Act, the Collector has been only given the powers to call for and examine the record. No further remedy is provided against the said order passed by the authority exercising powers U/Sec. 23(2) of the Mamlatdar's Court Act.

¶28

In the light of the above, the Additional Commissioner could not have exercised the jurisdiction and entertained the

¶29

4 wp 3142.13

¶30

revision filed by the present respondent Nos. 5 to 7. The impugned order passed by the Additional Commissioner cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed and set aside and hereby quashed and set aside.

¶31

Rule is made absolute in above terms.

¶32

Shri Bade Patil, the learned counsel for respondents at this stage seeks liberty to challenge the order of the Sub Divisional Officer passed in revision filed by present petitioners.

¶33

If in law the respondents are entitled to challenge the said

¶34

order, the respondents may initiate such proceedings as would be permissible in law.

¶35

Sd/-

¶36

[ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]

¶37

bsb/April 13

Devram Babu Avhad and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Devram Babu Avhad and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vishwambhar Gahininath Kale and Ors. Vs Special Recovery Officer, Vasant Dada Nagri Sahakari Bank Ltd. and Anr.

Gorakshanath Laxman Dere and Another Vs Ravi Savleram Dere and Others

Manoj Madhukar Gaikwad Vs Ahmednagar Municipal Corporation

Ashru Bajirao Aglawae Vs Javedkhan Kasamkhan and Another

Leelabai Savleram Wakchaure Vs Ashok Savleram Wakchaure and Others

Leelabai Savleram Wakchaure Vs Ashok Savleram Wakchaure and Others