Ganesh Balasaheb Suryavanshi v. State Of Maharashtra Ministry Of Revenue

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.15665 OF 2023 Ganesh Balasaheb Suryavanshi ] Age : 32 years, Occ.: Business, ] R/at : Sutaralli, Awasari, ] Tal. Ambegaon, Dist. Pune ] .. Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Maharashtra, ] Through Revenue Minister, ] Ministry of Revenue, ] Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032.

]

2. Collector, ] Collector Office, Pune.

]

3. Tehsildar, ] Pune City, Pune.

] .. Respondents Mr. Suraj Gurav, i/by Mr. Aditya D. Gurav, for the Petitioner. Mr. N.C. Walimbe, Addl. G.P., with Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for the RespondentState. CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR & FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ DATE : 18 TH DECEMBER, 2023.

ORAL JUDGMENT : { Per A.S. Chandurkar, J. } 1.

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and by consent heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned AGP waives notice for the respondent-State. 2.

The only prayer made by the petitioner is for expeditious consideration 1/2 8-WP-15665-2023.doc Dixit

and adjudication of the Revision Application that has been preferred by the petitioner before the State Government under Section 79 of the Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act, 1874. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Revision Application has been preferred in January, 2023 and in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 17 th December 2015, the Revision Application is required to be decided within a period of one year of it being assigned to the Revisional Authority. Despite aforesaid, no steps have been taken to proceed with consideration of the Revision Application. 3.

In the aforesaid facts and considering the stipulation under Government Resolution dated 17 th December 2015, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the 1 st respondent to consider and decide the pending Revision Application within a period of four months on its own merits and in accordance with law. The Revision Application shall be decided by 30 th April 2024, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as the parties likely to be affected by its adjudication. All points on merits are kept open. 4.

Rule is disposed of in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs. [ FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J. ] [ A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ] 2/2 8-WP-15665-2023.doc Dixit