Ramesh Motilal Kumawat and Another Vs the Sub… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

Ramesh Motilal Kumawat and Another Vs the Sub… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the High Court, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, should interfere with the Tahsildar's and Sub-Divisional Officer's orders holding that a cart way existed and clearing the respondents' obstruction to it, given the petitioners' contention that no road existed until about two years prior, no cart way is referenced in the survey records, and the respondents were creating a new way under the garb of seeking permission to use the existing way.

Court's answer

On perusal of the orders of the Tahsildar and Sub-Divisional Officer and particularly the panchanama, the Court found that the revenue authorities noticed the existence of a cart way and recorded obstruction to it at the hands of the respondents, which obstruction was removed by clearing the cart way.

Ratio / Principle

Upon perusal of the panchanama, it was evident that the learned Tahsildar passed an appropriate order after considering the situation prevailing at the relevant time.

Key takeaways

The Court found no reason to interfere, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, with the order dated 07.10.2022 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhokardan, in Revision Application No.50 of 2022.ratio¶18
The Court equally declined to interfere with the order dated 14.03.2022 passed by the Tahsildar, Bhokardan, in File No.2020/JAMA-1/CR-68, exercising its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.ratio¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petition (Art. 227) — Cart way obstruction — The petitioners contended that no road existed until about two years earlier, that the respondents were creating a new way under the garb of seeking permission to use the way, and that no cart way appeared in the survey records. They challenged the Tahsildar, Bhokardan's order dated 14.03.2022 (File No.2020/JAMA-1/CR-68) clearing obstruction to a cart way, as confirmed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bhokardan, by order dated 07.10.2022 in Revision Application No.50 of 2022. On perusal of the panchanama, the Court found the revenue authorities had noticed the existence of a cart way, recorded obstruction at the respondents' hands and cleared it, and that the Tahsildar had passed an appropriate order considering the situation then prevailing. Finding no reason to interfere under Article 227 of the Constitution, the Single Judge dismissed the petition, with no order as to costs; pending civil applications, if any, stood disposed of.

2025:BHC-AUG:34570

1 944 WP 260-2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

944 WRIT PETITION NO. 260 OF 2023

RAMESH MOTILAL KUMAWAT AND ANOTHER VERSUS

THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER BHOKARDAN AND OTHERS

Mr. Sandeep N. Lute – Advocate for Petitioners Mr. Dnyaneshwar R. Korde – AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2, State Ms. Maya R. Jondhale and Kavita R. Jondhale – Advocates for Respondent No.3

CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 09.12.2025

PER COURT :

Heard learned Counsel for the respective parties.

The petitioners challenge the order dated 07.10.2022 passed by the

learned Sub–Divisional Officer, Bhokardan, in Revision Application No.50 of 2022, as well as the order dated 14.03.2022 passed by respondent No.2, Tahsildar, Bhokardan, in File No.2020/JAMA-1/CR-68.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners vehemently submits that, prior

to two years, the respondents had no road in existence and that under the garb of seeking permission to use the way, they are now creating a new way. He invited my attention to the panchanama placed on record and specifically pointed out that the panchanama records that at the time of inspection a statement was made to that effect that, out of love and affection, a foot way was permitted. He further submits that there is no

2 944 WP 260-2023.odt

reference to the existence of a cart way in the survey records and both the authorities failed to consider this material aspect and therefore prays to allow the present petition.

Having gone through the orders passed by the learned Tahsildar and the Sub – Divisional Officer and more particularly, the panchanama, I find that the revenue authorities noticed the existence of a cart way and also recorded that there was obstruction to it at the hands of the respondents. Consequently, the obstruction was removed by clearing the cart way. The said order has been confirmed by the learned Sub – Divisional Officer. Upon perusal of the panchanama, it is evident that the learned Tahsildar passed an appropriate order after considering the situation at the relevant time.

Therefore, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order dated 07.10.2022 passed by the learned Sub–Divisional Officer, Bhokardan, in Revision Application No.50 of 2022, as well as the order dated 14.03.2022 passed by respondent No.2, the Tahsildar, Bhokardan, in File No.2020/JAMA-1/CR-68, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

In view thereof, the petition stands dismissed. No order as to costs.

Pending Civil Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ]

Pooja Kale/