Sushil Prakash Wagh v. Baban Shripati Wagh Since Dec Thr Legal Heirs And ORS

Amberkar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10886 OF 2025 State Bank of India .. Petitioner

Versus

Hon'ble Minister for Revenue and Forest, Department of Government of Maharashtra & Ors.

.. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12137 OF 2025 Sushil Prakash Wagh .. Petitioner

Versus

Baban Shripati Wagh (since deceased) through Legal Heirs Tukaram Shripati Wagh & Ors.

.. Respondents ....................

 Mr. Vishal Kanade a/w Ms. Saloni Kapadia & Ms. Daksha Kasekar i/by M/s. Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, Advocates for Petitioner  Ms. P.J. Gavhane, AGP for State  Mehernaz Contractor a/w Naomi Mehta, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 9 & 10  Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 11 to 17  Mr. Chaitanya B. Nikte a/w Ms. Esha Malik, Advocates for Respondent Nos. 19 to 21 ...................

CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.

DATE : MARCH 09, 2026 P. C.

:

1.

Heard learned Advocates appearing for the parties. 2.

In the present case, it is prima facie seen that Petitioner Bank is aggrieved in view of the specific directions contained in the impugned order dated 14.10.2024 setting aside the order of learned Deputy

Director of Land Records (for short "DDLR") which directed recording of charge of Petitioner Bank on the subject land. Order of DDLR has been set aside by the State without hearing the concerned Bank. Hence the present Petition.

3.

Without going into the factual aspects and disputed questions of facts, it would be appropriate if the concerned Bank i.e. Petitioner is heard by State in the challenge maintained to the order passed by DDLR since there is specific direction given in the impugned order which affects the substantive rights of Petitioner Bank in the subject land. Petitioner undertakes to file intervention Application before the State. The same shall be disposed of in accordance with law alongwith the Revision proceedings. Hence impugned order dated 14.10.2024 is quashed and set aside, without giving any imprimatur on merits of the matter. The State is directed to rehear the RTS 3421/590/M.N. 8/L-5 filed under Section 257 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 ("MLRC"). Needless to state that private Respondents represented by Mr. Bhujbal and Ms.

Contractor shall also be entitled to be heard by the State in accordance with law. Intervention Application shall be filed by the Bank within a period of 2 weeks from today as apprised by Mr. Kanade. Hearing of Revision Application along with Intervention Application in the challenge to the order passed by DDLR dated 16.01.

State within a period of 16 weeks from today. All contentions raised by private Respondents and Petitioner Bank in the Revision proceedings are expressly kept open. Private Respondents who desire to file Intervention Application to be heard alongwith the Bank by the State are permitted to file the same which shall also be heard and decided by the Revisional Authorities in accordance with law along with challenge to the order passed by the DDLR. 4.

With the above directions, present Writ Petition No. 10886 of 2025 is disposed.

5.

At this juncture, Mr. Nikte would submit that Writ Petition no. 12137 of 2025 which is slated for hearing tomorrow may also be disposed of in view of the order passed above. Writ Petition No. 12137 of 2025 is taken on record by consent of the parties. Some of the private Respondents have challenged the same order of the DDLR therein. However in view of above order, no further order is required to be passed in the said Petition. Hence, Writ Petition No. 12137 of 2025 is accordingly disposed.

Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ] by RAVINDRA MOHAN AMBERKAR Date:

2026.03.09 18:56:57 +0530 RAVINDRA MOHAN AMBERKAR