Bombay High Court
DINESH BABULAL MALIversusTHE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The writ petition is not maintainable because an alternative remedy under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 is available.
Summary
The petitioner, Dinesh Babulal Mali, challenged an order dated 06‑01‑2021 passed by the Sub‑Divisional Officer, Dhule, by filing a writ petition. The respondent’s Additional Government Pleader raised a preliminary objection that an alternate and equally efficacious remedy is available under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The Court examined whether the writ petition was maintainable in view of that statutory remedy. Finding that the alternative remedy was indeed available, the Court declined to entertain the writ petition and disposed of it, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate appellate authority. The Court further ordered that any time spent on the present petition be taken into account for condonation of delay if an appeal is filed within eight weeks, and that the interim order dated 07‑04‑2021 continue to operate.
Issues considered
- Whether the writ petition is maintainable when an alternative remedy under Section 247 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 is available.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 — s. 247
Subjects
- writ petition
- alternative remedy
- Section 247
- Maharashtra Land Revenue Code
- preliminary objection
- appellate authority
- condonation of delay
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:12334
Dilwale 1 79-WP- 5635-21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
79 WRIT PETITION NO. 5635 OF 2021
Dinesh Babulal Mali
VERSUS
The Sub Divisional Officer & Another
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. S. H. Lathkar h/f Mr. Subodh P. Shah
AGP for Respondents: Mr. A. D. Wange
...
CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
DATE : 18.03.2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. The petitioner assails the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by the
Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhule.
3. The learned AGP has raised a preliminary objection as to the
tenability of the present petition on the ground of availability of an
alternate and equally efficacious remedy under Section 247 of the
Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.
4. In view of the availability of an alternate remedy, I am not inclined
to entertain the present writ petition and the same stands disposed of
with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the impugned order before the
appropriate Appellate Authority.
5. In the event the petitioner files the appeal within a period of eight
weeks from today, the time spent in prosecuting the present writ petition
Dilwale 2 79-WP- 5635-21.odt
shall be taken into consideration by the Appellate Authority while
deciding an application for condonation of delay.
6. The interim order passed by this Court on 07.04.2021 shall
continue to operate till the Appellate Authority decides the matter.
[ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
JUDGE
Checking your session…