Tahsildar's review order cancelling a non-agricultural permission was challenged for want of sanction under Section 258 MLR Code. The Court quashed the review order and remanded the matter to the Tahsildar to decide afresh after addressing the jurisdictional objection.
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.
1
2024:BHC-NAG:394
29.wp.175.19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.175 OF 2019
Ananda Awadhooth Deole .Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mumbai and others
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order
Mrs. R.S. Sirpurkar, Advocate for petitioner. Shri N.S. Rao, A.G.P. for respondents/State.
CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR, J. DATED : 09/01/2024
“258. Review of orders
(1) The State Government and every Revenue or Survey Officer may, either on its or his own motion or on the application of any party interested, review any order passed by itself or any of its or his predecessors in office and pass such orders in reference thereto as it or he thinks fit:
C.L. Dhakate
29.wp.175.19.odt
2
(i) discovery of new and important matter or evidence;
(ii) some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record;
(iii) any other sufficient reason.
(3) For the purpose of this Section the Collector shall be deemed to be the successor in office of any Revenue or Survey Officer and to whom there is no successor in the district.
(4) An order which has been dealt with an appeal or on revision shall not be reviewed by any Revenue or Survey Officer subordinate to the appellate or revisional authority.
(5) Order passed in review shall on no account be reviewed.”
C.L. Dhakate
3 29.wp.175.19.odt
goes to the root of the matter and decides the jurisdiction of the Tahsildar to review the order, under Section 258 of the MLR Code, it is necessary to remand the matter back to the Tahsildar to decide the same afresh after taking into consideration the objection raised by the petitioner as regards the jurisdiction of the Tahsildar to review under Section 258 of the MLR Code. Accordingly, I pass the following order:
ii) The impugned order dated 12.12.2018 passed by the Tahsildar, Malegaon in Revenue Case No. N.A.P.34/Nagartas/20/2017-2018, is hereby quashed and set aside.
iii) The matter is remanded back to the Tahsildar to decide the same afresh after hearing both the parties and after taking into consideration the above referred observation made in the judgment.
Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
JUDGE
C.L. Dhakate
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tahsildar had jurisdiction under Section 258 MLR Code to review his own non-agricultural permission order without sanction from the higher authority.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ananda Awadhooth Deole
The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Department of Revenue, Mantralaya, Mumbai
Anil S. Kilor
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
