Bombay High Court

SMT. VITHABAI GANPAT YENDARKAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS CHIEF SECRETARY AND ORS.

Decided: 31 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal's remand of the proceedings on the basis of improper notice service is valid and not subject to interference.

Summary

The petitioners challenged an order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (MRT) which remanded proceedings back to the first authority (ALT) on the ground that the notice of the proceedings had not been properly served on the owner. The High Court examined whether the MRT's decision warranted interference. The Court held that the MRT’s remand was based on a procedural defect and did not merit judicial interference. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, though the parties were directed to appear before the appellate authority on a specified date and were allowed to raise merits thereafter. The interim application was also disposed of.

Issues considered

Whether the order of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal remanding the proceedings to the first authority on the ground of improper service of notice is liable to be interfered with

Subjects

Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal
remand
notice service
writ petition
appellate authority

Judgment

                                                                       36-WP-3358-17+.doc


                                                                                Sayali


                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                   CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    WRIT PETITION NO. 3358 OF 2017
SAYALI             Vithabai Ganpat Yendarkar and Others         … Petitioners
DEEPAK
UPASANI                       V/s.
                   State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Chief
Digitally signed
by SAYALI
DEEPAK
                   Secretary and Others                         … Respondents
UPASANI
Date: 2026.08.31
14:52:30 +0530
                   Mr. Amogh Singh i/b Jeet Gandhi, for Petitioners.
                   Ms. Mamta S. Srivastava, for Respondent no. 1.
                   Mr. Mahendra M. Agavekar, for Respondent nos. 2 to
                   7.


                                                CORAM      : AMIT BORKAR, J.

                                                DATED      : AUGUST 31, 2026
                   P.C.:

                   1.      By the impugned order, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal
                   remanded proceedings back to the ALT. The proceedings arise out
                   of the exercise of power under Section 32G read with Section
                   32M.

                   2.      MRT appears to have remanded the matter back to the first
                   authority merely on the ground that notice of the proceedings
                   was not properly served upon the owner. If this be so, in my
                   opinion, no interference is required in the impugned order.

                   3.      Hence, the petition is dismissed.




                                                      1
                                                    36-WP-3358-17+.doc


4.   However, the parties shall appear before the appellate
authority on 21st September, 2026 at 11.00 a.m.

5.   All rights and contentions of the parties on merits are kept
open to be agitated.

6.   The Interim Application is also disposed of.

7.   Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.




                                          (AMIT BORKAR, J.)




                                2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…