KISAN DAGDU BHOR SINCE DECEASED THRO. HIS LEGAL HEIRS AND REPRSEN.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO. SUB-DIVISINAL OFFICER

                                                                      8-WP16128-2025.DOC

                                                                                  Santosh

                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                                     WRIT PETITION NO. 16128 OF 2025

                      Kisan Dagdu Bhor Since Deceased Through
                      His Legal Heirs & Representative 1. Alka
                      Kisan Bhor & Ors                                     ...Petitioners
                                          Versus
                      The State of Maharashtra Through Sub-
                      Divisional Officer & Ors                          …Respondents

SANTOSH
SUBHASH               Mr. Sanjay Shinde, for the Petitioner.
KULKARNI              Mr. Prashant Darandale, for Respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4.
Digitally signed by
SANTOSH SUBHASH
KULKARNI
                      Smt. M. S. Srivastav, AGP for the State.
Date: 2026.09.29
14:57:06 +0530


                                                   CORAM:     N. J. JAMADAR, J.
                                                   DATED:     28th SEPTEMBER, 2026

                      Oral Order:-

                      1.   Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.


                      2.   The challenge in this petition is to an order dated 26 th May,

                      2025 passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Junnar-Ambegaon

                      Sub-Division, Manchar, District – Pune, whereby the revision

                      application preferred by respondent Nos.2 to 4 against an order

                      dated 9th March, 2023 passed by the Tahsildar Ambegaon in

                      Rasta Case No.50/2021 under the provisions of Mamlatdars

                      Courts Act, 1906, came to be allowed and the said order was set

                      aside.




                                                     1/4
                                                8-WP16128-2025.DOC

3.    By the impugned order, the Sub-Divisional Officer directed

the   respondent   therein,   the   predecessor-in-title    of   the

petitioners, to remove the impediment purportedly caused in the

respondent Nos.2 and 3’s access to their agricultural land.


4.    It appears that, the revision application was preferred on

31st July, 2023.      During the pendency of the revision

application, respondent therein – the predecessor-in-title of the

petitioners, passed away on 26th September, 2024.          However,

without bringing the legal representatives of the deceased

respondent, the Sub-Divisional Officer decided the revision and

set aside the order passed by the Tahsildar. It was, inter alia,

recorded that despite adequate opportunity having been given to

the respondent, the latter did not file any written submission or

canvassed submissions before the Sub-Divisional Officer.


5.    Evidently, the respondent in the revision application had

passed away before the Sub-Divisional Officer took up the

revision for hearing and final disposal.    The impugned order

came to be passed against a party who was dead and

consequently the proceeding had abated.


6.    In these circumstances, without delving into the merits of

the matter, this Court considers it appropriate to quash and set

aside the impugned order and remit the revision application
                              2/4
                                                   8-WP16128-2025.DOC

back to the Sub-Divisional Officer for a decision afresh in

accordance with law.


7.    The learned Counsel for the petitioners – the legal

representatives of the deceased respondent in the revision,

submits that the petitioners have no objection to set aside the

abatement and hear the revision application afresh.


8.    The impugned order stands quashed and set aside.


9.    The abatement of the revision application also stands set

aside.


10.   The revision application stands restored to the file of Sub-

Divisional Officer for a fresh decision in accordance with law.


11.   The    respondents    shall    carry   out    the   necessary

amendment in the revision application before the Sub-Divisional

Officer within a period of two weeks from the date of uploading

of this order.


12.   The parties, including the petitioners, shall appear before

the Sub-Divisional Officer on 26th October, 2026.


13.   The Sub-Divisional Officer is requested to make an

endeavour to hear and decide the revision application as




                               3/4
                                                 8-WP16128-2025.DOC

expeditiously as possible and, preferably, within a period of four

months thereafter.


14.   All contentions of all the parties are expressly kept open.


15.   The petition stands disposed.


                                          [N. J. JAMADAR, J.]




                               4/4