Bombay High Court
DEVRAJ BABASAHEB PATIL AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE REVENUE DEPT. AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The petition is disposed as premature because no division has been effected and the statutory procedure has not been triggered.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the division of Paal village in Karad Taluka, Satara District, alleging that the division into an independent revenue area was effected without complying with the procedure mandated by Section 4(4) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. They submitted an affidavit dated 18‑10‑2023 indicating that no draft notification had been published, thereby denying villagers the opportunity to raise objections. The petitioners also relied on a communication dated 13‑06‑2023 from the Divisional Commissioner, which stated that due to substantial opposition, the division was not recommended. The Court observed that, in the absence of any draft notification or subsequent action effecting the division, the petition was premature. Consequently, the Court disposed of the petition, noting that the petitioners may revive the suit if the division is later pursued.
Issues considered
- Whether the division of Paal village into an independent revenue area was carried out in violation of the procedural requirements of Section 4(4) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966.
Legislation cited
- Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 — s. 4(4)
Subjects
- land revenue
- village division
- procedural compliance
- Section 4(4)
- writ petition
- Maharashtra
Judgment
16-WP-6472-2023.doc
Digitally signed
by HARISH
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
HARISH VITHAL
VITHAL CHAUDHARI CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CHAUDHARI Date:
2026.08.18
19:54:09 +0530 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6472 OF 2023
Devraj Babasaheb Patil And Another ...Petitioners.
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra
Through The Revenue Dept. And Others ...Respondents.
——————
Mr. P. B. Shah a/w Gunjan Shah & Rahul Patil for the Petitioners.
Mr. V. M. Mali, AGP for the Respondent-State.
Mr. Manoj Patil a/w Siddhesh Kadam i/b Akash Murudkar for Respondent No. 7.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Date : August 18, 2026.
P. C. :
1. The challenge in the present petition was to the division of Paal
village, Taluka Karad, District Satara, without following the prescribed
procedure under Section 4(4) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code,
1966.
2. Mr. Shah, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, points
out the aidavit dated 18.10.2023 iled by the Tehsildar, Karad, District
Satara, stating that there is no draft notiication which has been
published under Section 4(4). If any such notiication is published as far
as the declaration of the said village as an independent revenue area is
concerned, the petitioners and all other afected villagers will get an
Harish 1 of 2
16-WP-6472-2023.doc
opportunity to submit their objections. Therefore, the petition is
premature. He further points out the communication of 13.06.2023
from the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune, stating that as
there is opposition to the proposal by substantial villagers, the division
of the village as an independent revenue village is not recommended
for now. He further submits that subsequent to this notiication of
2023, there is no action which has been taken and there is no division.
3. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.
4. It is open for the petitioners to revive the cause in the event the
said Paal village is sought to be set up as an independent revenue area.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Harish 2 of 2
Checking your session…