Prabhakar S/O. Balwantrao Mungalkar v. Suresh S/O. Jivan Khirade And Others

5-wp477.25.odt 1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION No.477 OF 2025 (Prabhakar s/o. Balwantrao Mungalkar Vs. Suresh s/o. Jivan Khirade and others) __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. Paresh Thakur , Advocate for petitioner.

Mrs. M.S. Naik, AGP for respondent No.7.

CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.

DATE : 08 th AUGUST, 2025.

1.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner's grievance is against the judgment and order dated 6th September, 2024 passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Nagpur dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner.

3.

The petitioner had initially filed an application before the Tahsildar Karanja under Sections 36 and 36(A) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 seeking restoration of possession of agricultural land bearing Survey No.16/1, admeasuring 06 H.18 R of Mouza Zanja, Taluka Karanja (Lad), District Washim. This application came to be rejected by the Tahsildar by order dated 5.8.2021. The petitioner then challenged this order before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal

5-wp477.25.odt 2/3 vide Appeal No.11/2021. The Tribunal has passed final order by relying upon the judgment of the Full Bench in the matter of Baliram s/o. Reva Chavhan Vs. Gajanan s/o.Shekrao Wanjare, 2023 DGLS (Bom.) 1319.

4.

Learned A.G.P. for the respondent No.7 opposes the petition and submits that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Full Bench of this Hon'ble Court. 5.

In the impugned judgment and order it is specifically observed that the issue involved in the petition is covered by the judgment of the Full Bench referred above. It is held that the petitioner was not tribal in the year 1970 when the land was sold to the tenant since his caste was not included in the list of Scheduled Tribes and therefore he is not entitled for restoration of the said land. It is also observed that the land was held by the tenant Namdeo Haribhau Khirade and in Revenue Case No.353/13/1964-65 the sale certificate issued by the Tahsildar vide order dated 20.3.1970 was never challenged by the grand-father of the appellant till his death nor by the appellant/petitioner.

6.

In view of the controversy involved, it is clear that the issue is covered by the judgment of the Full Bench referred

5-wp477.25.odt 3/3 above. There is no perversity in the impugned judgment and order passed by the Revenue Tribunal. As such, no interference is called for in the impugned judgment and order. 7.

Writ Petition is, therefore, dismissed.

(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) Wadode Signed by: Mr. Devendra Wadode Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 08/08/2025 19:25:52