Amol Ashok Dighe v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1) WP-260.2020.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 905 WRIT PETITION NO.260 OF 2020 AMOL ASHOK DIGHE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. M.R. Sonawane, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. N.T.Bhagat, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3. ...

CORAM :

Rohit B. Deo, J.

DATE :

9th January 2020.

PER COURT :- .

Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2.

I am satisfed that this petition is not maintainable.

3.

The petition is preferred by Shri Amol Ashok Dighe, who was the non-applicant No.9 in the revision assailing the order impugned, which is passed by SubDivisional Offcer in Revision challenging the order dated 29.04.2016 passed by the Mamlatdar. By the order impugned the revision is dismissed.

4.

The petitioner was concededly not a party in the proceeding before Mamlatdar.

(2) WP-260.2020.odt 5.

However, learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that he is aggrieved by the order dated 29.04.2016 passed by the Mamlatdar.

6.

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29.04.2016 passed by the Mamlatdar, he could have fled Revision, which he evidently has not done.

7.

The petition is dismissed.

8.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner be granted liberty to fle Revision challenging the order dated 29.04.2016.

9.

I do not think such liberty would be necessary since even according to learned Counsel for the petitioner, the persons who were parties before Mamlatdar and in the Revision have already approached this Court in the Writ Petition. The petitioner is free to seek intervention in the said Writ Petition, if so advised.

(ROHIT B. DEO, J.) VD_Dhirde