Three Circle Agrocon Pvt. Ltd. v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS

Digitally signed by MULEY SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO Date:

2025.09.22 11:36:23 +0530 MULEY SHUBHAM PRAVINRAO 7-WP-11058-2024.DOCX Shubham

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 11058 OF 2024 Three Circle Agrocon Pvt. Ltd.

...Petitioner

Vs.

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...Respondents

______________________________________________________ Mr. S. S. Patwardhan a/w Akshay Hardas, Anurag Patwardhan, Aaroh Kulkarni and Aakash Dube i/by Mrinal A. Shelar for the Petitioner. Ms. S. D. Vyas, Addl.GP a/w M. S. Bane, AGP for State. ______________________________________________________ CORAM : M.S. Sonak & Advait M. Sethna, JJ.

DATED : 19 September 2025 P.C.:- 1.

Heard Mr. Patwardhan along with Mr. Hardas for the Petitioner and Ms. Bane, learned AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 3 to 5.

2.

The Petitioner seeks a mandamus for mutation and inclusion of its name in the survey records, a mandamus for delivery of possession of the land offered in exchange of the land referred to in Exhibit-C or a mandamus to deliver free of debris - vacant and peaceful possession of the Petitioner's land occupied by the second respondent. There is also a prayer for payment of rental compensations.

7-WP-11058-2024.DOCX 3.

Considering the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, we find that the Petitioner has several alternate and efficacious remedies for carrying out mutation in the event the case pleaded by the Petitioner in this Petition is indeed correct. Even the other reliefs prayed for by the Petitioner would involve investigation into highly disputed questions of fact. In the circumstances, we are satisfied that this is not a fit case to exercise of summary and extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

4.

Therefore, we decline to entertain this Petition. We however, grant the Petitioner liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the appropriate authorities/Court for redressal of its grievances.

5.

We further clarify that we have not examined the Petitioner's contention on merit and therefore all contentions raised in this Petition are left open to be decided by the appropriate authority/Court if the Petitioner resort to the alternate remedies. 6.

With the above liberties and for the above reasons, we dispose of this Petition without any order for costs. (Advait M. Sethna, J) (M. S. Sonak, J.)