-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3837 OF 2010 Richard Dias. ..Petitioner. Versus The Tehsildar, Karjat & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Pratap Patil for the petitioner. Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, AGP for R-1. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : October 5, 2011. P. C. : 1. Heard Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, learned AGP for respondent no.1. None appears on behalf of rest of the respondents, despite service. 2. By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order passed by Mamlatdar under section 5 of the Mamlatdar’s Act, 1906. It is the contention of the petitioner that Mamlatdar has no jurisdiction to pass the said order and therefore has approached this Court directly invoking jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3. There is no dispute that revision under section 23(2) of the Mamlatdar’s Act, 1906 is maintainable before the Collector/SDO. The point of jurisdiction of Mamlatdar can be srp -: 2 :- raised before the Collector/SDO. Faced with this difficulty, Mr. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to approach Collector/SDO by way of revision. Leave with liberty as prayed for is granted. Petition is disposed of as withdrawn. 4. In order to enable the petitioner to approach the revisional authority, the interim order passed by this Court on 30/4/2010 is continued for the period of four weeks from today. It is expressly made clear that all the points and contentions are kept open for the petitioner to be agitated before the revisional authority. Needless to mention that the petitioner is entitled to take advantage of article 14 of the Limitation Act. (RANJIT MORE, J.)