Kalpana Santoshkumar Bankar v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretry And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

by URMILA PRAMOD INGALE Date:

2025.08.08 19:42:02 +0530 URMILA PRAMOD INGALE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4262 OF 2024 Mrs. Kalpana Santoshkumar Bankar ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and ors.

.... Respondents **** Mr. Ajay Joshi, for the Petitioner.

Mr. N.C. Walimbe, Addl. GP a/w Ms.Ashwini A. Purav, for Respondents No. 1 to 6-State.

Mr. Pralhad Paranjape a/w Mr. Rahul Punjabi, for Respondent No.8.

Mr. Surel Shah, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Rushabh Phade, for the Respondent No. 9.

Ms. Manisha Devkar, for Respondent No.10.

**** CORAM :

M.S.KARNIK AND N.R.BORKAR, JJ.

DATE :

08th AUGUST 2025 P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the order dated 18/06/2019 passed by the Hon'ble Minister (Revenue) and as per this order, Hon'ble Minister had directed the District Superintendent of Land Records to take appropriate decision in the matter in the light of the observations/findings in the order dated 18/06/2019.

2.

The petitioner in this petition challenged the order dated 30/05/2022 whereby, according to the petitioner, the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Malshiraj has not taken the informed decision in terms of the observations/ directions of the Hon'ble Minister. Learned counsel therefore submitted that the matter should be remitted to the Superintendent of Land Records for a fresh consideration of the matter in terms of the order passed by the Hon'ble Minister.

3.

We are afraid that the submission made by the petitioner is misconceived. We find that the Hon'ble Minister by the impugned order while setting aside the corrigendum dated 18/09/2017 had directed the District Superintendent of Land Records to take appropriate decision in the light of the observations and in accordance with law. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 30/05/2022, it is for the petitioner to resort to appropriate remedy available in law to challenge the order before appropriate forum or before the Hon'ble Minister. We are therefore not inclined to entertain the present petition. The remedy of the petitioner to challenge the order dated 30/05/2022 is kept open.

4.

It is made clear that we have not made any observations on merits.

5.

Learned Senior Advocate for the respondent no.9 - contesting respondent and the applicant before the Hon'ble Minister submits on instructions that if appropriate remedy is resorted to within a period of 30 days from today, the respondent no. 9 shall not raise any objection as regards to delay in filing the revision application/appeal.

6.

Keeping all contentions open, the writ petition is disposed of. (N.R.BORKAR, J.) (M.S.KARNIK, J.)