Bombay High Court
A. K. ENTERPRISES THRU PARTNERversusDEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF LAND RECORD PANVEL AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The Court held that the revenue authority must complete the subdivision assessment and mutation within six weeks, and the petitioner cannot be forced to pay the charges again.
Summary
The petitioner, A.K. Enterprises, filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the Deputy Superintendent of Land Records to prepare and sanction a subdivision assessment record and to update the revenue record for its unacquired property. The petitioner had paid the required survey and mutation charges twice because CIDCO raised an objection, which stalled the process. The respondents argued that the objection by CIDCO prevented the revenue work from proceeding. The Court held that the petitioner should not be compelled to pay the same charges again and that the revenue authority must complete the pending work despite CIDCO's objection. Accordingly, the Court directed the revenue officer to finish the assessment and mutation within six weeks of the order. The petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the revenue authority is obligated to complete the subdivision assessment and mutation despite an objection raised by CIDCO.
- Whether the petitioner can be required to pay the survey and mutation charges a second time for the same cause of action.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- mandamus
- Article 226
- land revenue
- subdivision assessment
- mutation
- CIDCO objection
- double payment
Judgment
KSG 23-Wp-6910-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 6910 OF 2026
A. K. Enterprises … Petitioner
V/s.
Deputy Superintendent of Land Record
Panvel & Ors. … Respondents
_______________________________________
Mr. Sugandh Deshmukh a/w Mr. Vaibhav Thorave for the Petitioner.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl.G.P., a/w Ms. P.B. Chavan, A.G.P. for Respondent-State.
Mr. Soham Bhalerao i/b DSK Legal for the Respondent No.2-CIDCO.
Mr. Anand Kulkarni for the Respondent No.3.
_______________________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATE : 10th September 2026
P.C. :
1) By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
the Petitioner is seeking a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
directions under Article 226 of Constitution of India, directing the
Respondent No.1 to forthwith prepare and sanction sub division assessment
record (Akarphod Patrak) and to make necessary changes in the revenue
record in respect of Petitioners unacquired property more specifically
described in the pleadings and prayer clause (A) of the Petition.
2) Mr. Deshmukh, submitted that, for conducting survey, for
preparing the necessary plans and effecting mutation entries in the record as
contemplated under the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, the Petitioner has
1/2
KSG 23-Wp-6910-2026.doc
paid the charges twice to the Respondent No.1, because the CIDCO had
raised an objection. Despite that till today the procedure is not completed.
3) Ms. Chavan, learned A.G.P. submitted that, after the Petitioner
filed the Application for carrying out survey in the property and for effecting
necessary changes in the revenue record, the Respondent No.2-CIDCO raised
an objection and therefore it could not be carried out till today.
4) We may note here that, calling upon the Petitioner to pay the
concerned charges repeatedly for the same cause cannot be countenanced. If
the CIDCO has raised the objection, once again, the Revenue Authorities
ought to have called upon CIDCO to pay the said charges as the objection
was raised by it. The Petitioner ought not to have been saddled with the
payment of charges for the same cause of action.
5) Be that as it may, taking into consideration the fact that, the
Petitioner has already deposited all the necessary legal charges with the
concerned Department for measurement of the land and for effecting
necessary mutation entries in the revenue record, we direct the Respondent
No.1 to complete the said procedure within a period of six weeks from the
date of uploading of present Order on the official website of High Court of
Bombay.
6) Petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.
( KAMAL KHATA, J. ) ( A.S. GADKARI, J. )
Digitally
signed by
KIRAN
KIRAN SANJAY 2/2
SANJAY GHUGE
Date:
GHUGE 2026.09.17
11:29:53
+0530
Checking your session…