TARABAI VITTHAL PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ORS

                                     1                         943.odt


      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    WRIT PETITION NO. 4625 OF 2026
                     TARABAI VITTHAL PATIL
                              VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
                                 ...
           Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Bhushan Mahajan
        AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 & 6 : Ms. Deepali Jape
        Advocate for Respondent No. 5 : Mr. Bachate Pralhad D.
                                 …

                          CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
                          DATE : 18th AUGUST, 2026


PER COURT :

1.           The Petitioner is seeking quashment of the letter dated

11.11.2025, issued by Respondent no. 2 / Tahsildar, Jalgaon, directing

Respondent no. 4 – Village Revenue Officer, Tongaon, to remove the

name of Nababai Shama Patil (47) from the other rights column of 7/12

extract of Gat no. 561/1 situated at Village Tongaon, Taluka Bhadgaon,

District Jalgaon.

2.           The Petitioner who is daughter-in-law of one Nababai

Shama Patil, has filed the present Writ Petition in capacity of the legal

heir of the owner of Survey no. 138/2 situated at Tongaon. Her name is

already mutated in other rights column vide mutation entry no. 47 in 7/12

extract of Survey no. 138/2 which is at Exhibit ‘A’ of the Writ Petition.
                                     2                       943.odt


3.           It is the contention of the Petitioner that one Kadeerkhan

Haji Jorawarkhan, who is Respondent no. 5 has filed an Application to

the Tahsildar, for deletion of the trees from the 7/12 extract of land Gat

no. 561/1 to the extent of 81 Ares purchased by him in 1987. According

to him, when he purchased the said land there were no trees as shown in

other rights column. The trees of Mangoes, Jamun and Banding Boja was

shown in other rights column. Therefore, Respondent no. 5 requested to

delete the absolete entries from other rights column.

4.           Pursuant to his Application, the panchnama was conducted

by the Circle Officer on 03.11.2025, wherein it is recorded that there are

no trees standing as stated in the Application by Respondent no. 5.

Accordingly, the Circle Officer has informed the Tahsildar, Tongaon, that

he has conducted the panchnama and he did not find the trees of

Mangoes and Jamun standing on the land in Gat no. 561/1 as mentioned

in other rights column of the 7/12 extract.

5.           On receiving such report from the Circle Officer, the

Tahsildar has passed an order directing the Village Revenue Officer,

Tongoan, by giving reference to the Application filed by Respondent no.5

on 30.09.2025, directing the Village Revenue Officer, to delete entries of

Mangoes trees and Jamun trees as shown against the names of the

respective persons along with the Bunding Boja from Gat no. 561.
                                     3                        943.odt


6.           Since the entries have become absolete, the learned

Advocate for the Petitioner submits that pursuant to the said order, the

name of Nababai as shown at page no. 18, in other rights column as

Nababai Shama Patil (47), has been deleted. He submits that the

application was restricted only to the deletion of the trees, not for

deletion of names. The name of Nababai, the ancestor of the present

petitioner was deleted without issuing any notice to her legal heirs. Thus,

being aggrieved by the said deletion of the name of Nababai whose name

is independently shown apart from the trees. The Petitioner has

approached this Court only on the ground that the order directing deletion

of the trees along with the names has been passed without issuing any

notice or granting of any opportunity of hearing to the interested persons

amongst whom the Petitioner is one of the legal heir.

7.           Learned Advocate for Respondent no. 5 had opposed the

prayer made by the Petitioner.

8.           According to the learned AGP mutation entry no. 353 was

taken way back on 27.07.1979. However, it remained to be reflected in

the 7/12 extract. Therefore, no prejudice would be caused to the legal heir

of the Nababai Shama Patil. So far as deletion of name of Nababai from

other rights column is concerned, the deletion is done pursuant to the

circular issued by the Commissioner.
                                    4                        943.odt


9.          Learned Advocate for Respondent no.5 submits that the

Petitioner has to establish her relationship with said Nababai and through

whom the right are claimed by the Petitioner.

10.         Learned Advocate for the Petitioner relies on the 7/12

extract of adjoining land which belonged again to Nababai. The names of

the occupants are shown in the 7/12 extract of the adjoining land in

which one of the legal heir of Nababai name of the present Petitioner is

also shown. It is thus established that the present Petitioner is claiming

through the said Nababai.

11.         It also needs to be appreciated that in identical facts of the

adjoining land in Gat no. 562 when the Application filed by one Ashraf

Khan, for deletion of similar entries about the encumbrance of the said

land was made. Tahsildar has issued a notice calling objections from the

interested persons. Thus, according to the Petitioner, in the present case

also such notice ought to have been issued by the Tahsildar, calling upon

the interested persons seeking objections from them. However, it no such

procedure has been followed.

12.         Thus, the fact remains that the order passed by the Tahsildar

dated 11.11.2025, on the basis of Application of Respondent no. 5 is

passed only by calling the report from the Circle Officer, and no

opportunity has been given to the interested persons by calling upon the
                                     5                        943.odt


interested persons to raise objections for deletion the encumbrance in

other rights column and deletion of non existent trees. Therefore, the

order dated 11.11.2025, is set aside and the matter is remanded back to

the Tahsildar.

13.          The Tahsildar is directed to follow the procedure for deletion

of the entries in other rights column by calling upon objections of the

interested persons, granting opportunity to all the parties concerned and

only thereafter, pass the appropriate orders.

14.          In the wake of aforementioned directions, the Writ Petition

stands disposed of.



                                      ( MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. )




SPC