Bombay High Court

ASHOK TUKARAM BHALERAO AND ANOTHERversusRAMESH NAMDEV PADOL AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court ordered that the status‑quo be maintained until the petitioners’ stay application is decided.

Summary

The petitioners, owners of land Gut Nos. 88 and 89, challenged an order of the Tahsildar, Bhokardan issued under the Mamlatdar Courts Act directing the Circle Officer to remove road obstructions adjoining their land. They argued that they were not made parties to the proceedings and that the order was passed without hearing them. The petitioners filed a revision application and a stay application before the Sub‑Divisional Officer (SDO), but neither was taken up for hearing. The respondent’s Additional Government Pleader (AGP) informed the court that both applications would be heard within two weeks. The court, noting the procedural lapse, disposed of the writ petition but directed that the status‑quo be maintained until the stay application is decided.

Issues considered

Whether the Tahsildar can pass an order affecting landowners without making them parties to the proceedings under the Mamlatdar Courts Act.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to a stay of the order pending hearing of their revision and stay applications.

Legislation cited

Mamlatdars Courts Act

Subjects

land ownership
obstruction removal
procedural fairness
revision application
stay order
Mamlatdar Courts Act

Judgment

                           1


     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

           910 WRIT PETITION NO. 11353 OF 2026

        ASHOK TUKARAM BHALERAO AND ANOTHER
                      VERSUS
          RAMESH NAMDEV PADOL AND OTHERS

                               ...
      Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Rahul D Khadap.
       AGP for Respondent/s-State : Ms. P. V. Diggikar.
                               ...

                      CORAM : MANJUSHA A. DESHPANDE, J.
                      DATE : 08.09.2026

PER COURT :-


1.    The petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the

Tahsildar, Bhokardan under the Mamlatdars Courts Act.


2.    It is contended that although they are owners of land

Gut Nos.88 and 89 and the order is passed directing that the

Circle Officer shall remove the obstructions from the road that

abutting the Bandh of Gut Nos.88 and 89, without adding

them as party to the proceedings. Although they have filed a

Revision Application before the SDO, challenging the said

order, the same was not taken up for hearing. Even the stay

application could not be heard. In the morning session, when

this matter called out, the learned AGP sought time to take

instructions about the status of the Revision Application filed

by the petitioners.
                             2




3.      Learned AGP informs that the stay application as well as

Revision will be taken up by SDO, Bhokardan within a period

of two (2) weeks from today.


4.      In view of the statement made by the learned AGP, on

instructions, the writ petition is disposed of. However,

considering that the petitioners were not made party before the

Tahsildar and an order came to be passed against them, there

shall be status-quo till their decision on the stay application.




                                 (MANJUSHA A. DESHPANDE, J.)

                                  ...

vmk/-

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…