1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3454/2008 (Smt. Kumud Nilkanth Dahankar and ors vs. Smt. Pranoti Prashant Dhawad and another) ====================================== Shri D.K.Dubey, Adv. for the petitioner Shri V.S.Kukday, Adv. for respondent No.1 Shri D.B.Patel, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2 CORAM : B.P.Dhamadhikari, J. DATE : 18 th NOVEMBER, 2008 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The prayer of the petitioner is that the impugned order dated 14.5.2008 passed by Additional Collector, Nagpur, in Revenue Appeal No. 24/RTS- 64/2005-2006 is unsustainable because the procedure which was rightly followed by the lower authority i.e. Revenue Inspector has been lost sight of. Advocate Shri Kukday, points out that the petitioner had already filed civil suit and the correctness or otherwise of mutation proceedings formed subject matter of this proceeding. He further points out that even if this Court takes any view of the matter, the Civil Court has to take appropriate view independently after appreciating the evidence on record. Advocate Dubey in reply points out that civil suit came to be dismissed in default and M.J.C. is also 2 rejected and challenge to that is now pending in M.C.A. before 10th Ad-hoc District Judge, Nagpur. It is apparent that the mutation orders are not binding in civil litigation and as civil litigation is going on between the parties, it will be futile on the part of this Court to take any view of the matter. I am, therefore, no inclined to interfere with the impugned order in writ jurisdiction. It is needless to mention that the impugned orders are not final and not binding on civil court and it is open to the petitioner to point out the incorrectness therein to the competent authority. With these observations, writ petition is dismissed. JUDGE Rvjalit