1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. WRIT PETITION NO.: 11717 OF 2010 *** 1. Heard Advocate Mr. Ghute for the Petitioner and learned A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. 2. Application moved by petitioner for correction of alleged inadvertent error while preparing maps after consolidation scheme has been rejected observing that in view of the judgment of Division Bench of this Court the authority has no jurisdiction to entertain such grievance after publication of scheme as per section 19 (1) of Bombay Prevention of Fragmentation and Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1947. 3. Shri Ghute contends that application was moved on 21st February, 2006 pointing out existing possession and alleging that lands in possession were not reflected in consolidation map. He, therefore, states that such application could not have been treated as an application under section 32 of 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. above mentioned 1947 Act. Learned A.G.P. contends that in map possession has been shown correctly and because of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.3043 of 1993 dated 24th February, 2003, cognizance of such grievance cannot be taken after 30 days of the publication of scheme. 4. Perusal of application of petitioner does not show either invocation of section 31-A or section 32 of 1947 Act. However, in view of oral arguments and also because of grievance therein, the efforts seems to be to show that consolidation map needed to be corrected to bring the same in consonance with position prevailing on the spot. It is not necessary for this Court to find out whether grievance can be taken cognizance of under section 31-A. The authority has to look into that aspect and if it finds that it cannot fall under section 31-A of 1947 Act it can pass appropriate orders. The judgment of 3 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. Honourable Division Bench of this Court is in relation to modification of scheme under section 32 and hence it has no bearing on exercise of powers under section 31-A by the authority. Hence, with direction to Respondent No.1 to examine grievance of petitioner in the light of provisions of section 31-A of 1947 Act, present writ petition is partly allowed. It is made clear that impugned order, which is passed under provisions of section 32 shall not come in the way of that authority while examining the grievance of petitioner as mentioned above. No costs. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:08/04/2011. ans/11717