Bombay High Court
DNYANOBA PRABHU BARGAJE AND OTHERSversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS ADDITIONAL DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER CHH SAMBHAJINAGAR AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Holding
The Court declined to interfere with the Commissioner’s order and directed the Commissioner to decide the pending revision within four months.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the order dated 07/05/2026 of the Additional Divisional Commissioner, which rejected their application for a stay of an order passed by the Additional Collector. The High Court observed that the same dispute is already sub-judice before it in Second Appeal No.689 of 2022, arising from a decree of the District Judge, Ambajogai. Given the pendency of the appeal, the Court found no ground to interfere with the Commissioner’s order. However, it directed the Commissioner to decide the pending revision within four months, after giving both parties an opportunity to be heard. The Court also noted that any mutation record changes made during the appeal would be subject to the final decision of the revision and the pending second appeal. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can interfere with the order of the Additional Divisional Commissioner rejecting a stay application when the matter is sub-judice in a higher appeal.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to a stay of the order pending the outcome of the second appeal.
Subjects
- writ petition
- stay order
- revision
- sub-judice
- civil appeal
- mutation record
- jurisdiction
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:31102
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8585 OF 2026
Dnyanoba Prabhu Bargaje and Others
VERSUS
State of Maharashtra Through Its Additional Divisional Commissioner
…
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. S. E. Shekade
AGP for Respondents-State : Mr. R. K. Ingole
…
CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
Dated : July 27, 2026
PER COURT :-
1. Heard.
2. The present Writ Petition takes exception to the order dated
07/05/2026 passed by the Additional Divisional Commissioner,
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar in File No.2026/ ROR/ RAV/ CR-97, by which
the petitioners' application for stay to the order passed by the
Additional Collector is rejected.
3. Perusal of the record indicates that the rights of the parties are
sub-judice before this Court in Second Appeal No.689 of 2022, which is
filed against the judgment and decree dated 03/08/2022 passed by the
District Judge, Ambajogai in Regular Civil Appeal No.28 of 2016. The
order impugned seeks to give effect to the decree as passed by the
District Judge.
Page 1 of 2
66 WP 8585-2026
4. In this background, this Court does not find any reason to
interfere in the impugned order. However, it would be in the fitness
of things if the learned Additional Divisional Commissioner decides
the pending revision within a period of four months from today after
giving opportunity to both the sides. With the above directions, the
writ petition is disposed of.
5. Needless to state that if any change in the mutation record is
made during the pendency of the appeal, it shall be subject to the
final decision of the revision before the Additional Divisional
Commissioner as well as the second appeal pending before this
Court.
( S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. )
vj gawade/-.
Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…