Dharamkumar Manaklal Bagrecha And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

2026:BHC-AUG:8539

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 901 WRIT PETITION NO. 1982 OF 2026 1.

Dharamkumar Manaklal Bagrecha 2.

Mrs. Surekha Vijaykumar Bagrecha, 3.

Mr. Vijaykumar Manaklal Bagrecha

...Petitioners

VERSUS

1.

State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Revenue Department 2.

The Deputy Director of Land Records, Nashik Division 3.

The District Superintendent of Land Records, Newasa Fata, Ahilyanagar 4.

The Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Rahata, Dist. Ahilyanagar 5.

Mr. Yogesh Thorat Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Rahata. 6.

Shri Sai Samarth Nagri Sahakari Patsanstha Maryadit Shirdi, Thr. its Chairman Mr. Tukaram Shankarrao Gondkar 7.

Manisha Shivaji Gondkar, R/o Shirdi Tq. Rahata Dist. Ahilyanagar.

8.

Vishwajeet Dilip Gondkar, ... Respondents R/o Shirdi Tq. Rahata Dist. Ahilyanagar.

...

Mr. Rameshwar F. Totala a/w Mr. Swapnil V. Lohiya h/for Mr. Kabra Vedant Shrigopalji, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. K. S. Patil, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 Mr. S. S. Chapalgaonkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 6 to 8 CORAM : Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J.

Dated : 24th February, 2026

PER COURT :- 1.

Heard Mr. Totala, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Mr. Patil, learned AGP for respondent nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. Chapalgaonkar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 6 to 8 2.

By the present petition, the petitioners take exception to the order dated 27.01.2026, passed by Respondent no.2- Deputy Director of Land Records, Nashik Division in Revenue Appeal No. 76 of 2025, whereby the appeal of Respondent Nos. 6 to 8 was partly allowed and quashed and set aside the order dated 13.05.2025 passed by Respondent no.3 District Superintendent of Land Record, Ahmednagar and remanded the matter to Respondent No.4 Deputy Superintendent of Land Record, Rahata to measure with directions to measure the land after service of notices to all the interested persons. 3.

Issue notice to the respondents. Learned AGP Mr. K. S. Patil, waives notice on behalf of respondent nos. 1 to 4 and learned counsel Mr. S.S. Chapalgaonkar, waives notice on behalf of respondent nos. 6 to 8.

4.

Respondent No.5 Mr. Yogesh Thorat,Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Rahata. is made party in person and no relief has been sought against him. Therefore, the petition is dismissed as against respondent No.5.

5.

After hearing both sides, it prima facie appears that there exists a dispute in respect of the properties described in Sale Deed Nos.

4167/2022 and 4169/2022 dated 23.08.2022, as well as Sale Deed Nos. 1378/1995, 1379/1995 and 1380/1995 dated 24.08.1995, registered with the Sub-Registrar, Rahata. As per contentions of the petitioners and respondent nos. 6 to 8, boundaries of their properties are incorrectly described in the respective sale deeds. Therefore, question was raised before the competent authorities. On 30.05.2025, Respondent No.3 passed an order in Appeal No. 60/2024 and directed Respondent No.4 to cancell the measurement in respect of property at Survey No. 124 (City Survey No.951), dated 27.02.2023. Being aggrieved by the said order, the present respondent nos. 6 to 8 approached before respondent No.2- Deputy Director of Land Record, Nashik Division by filing Appeal No. 76 of 2025 under section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. On 27.01.2026, Respondent No.2 passed the impugned order and quashed and set aside the order dated 30.05.2025 passed by Respondent No.3 and remanded the matter to Respondent No.4 for re-measurement of properties described in the respective sale deeds. 6.

No doubt, as per the provisions of section 257 of the MLRC, revision lies before the State Government against the impugned order, however, at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner made a proposal that the petitioners would be satisfied, if the properties are measured by other government official than Respondent No.4-Deputy Superintendent of Land Records, Rahata. Learned AGP as well as Mr. Chapalgaonkar, learned counsel for respondent nos. 6 to 8 also

consented that dispute may be resolved between the parties, if the properties described in Sale Deed Nos. 4167/2022, 4169/2022 dated 23.08.2022, so also Sale deed Nos. 1378/1995, 1379/1995 and 1380/1995, dated 24.08.1995 are measured through the competent person i.e. the Deputy Superintendent of Land Record, Rahuri, instead of respondent no.4, as per order the order dated 27.01.2026 passed by Respondent No.2.

7.

In view of the above, the Deputy Superintendent of Land Record, Rahuri shall issue notice to Petitioners and Respondent Nos. 6 to 8 as well as other interested persons, who are having interest in the properties described in Sale Deed Nos. 4167/2022, 4169/2022 dated 23.08.2022, so also Sale deed Nos. 1378/1995, 1379/1995 and 1380/1995, dated 24.08.1995 and after service of notice, shall measure the land within the period of three months from the date of appearance of Petitioners and Respondent Nos. 6 to 8. 8.

Respondent No.3 shall recover the measurement charges from the petitioners and respondent nos. 6 to 8 in equal proportion, as per rules.

9.

Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of.

( Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ) JPChavan