1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 5722 OF 2010 (Shashikant Madhaorao Mangle vs. Sau. Basantibai Jugalkishor Rathi) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. NOVEMBER 29, 2010. Heard Mrs. Raskar, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mrs. Raskar, learned counsel has today handed over an application for amendment of petition. The application is taken on record. The amendment sought is formal, hence granted. Necessary amendment be carried out forthwith. Heard Mrs. Raskar, learned counsel on merits. The impugned order refusing to accept report of Hand Writing expert consulted by the petitioner attained finality when Writ Petition No. 3941 of 2000 was disposed of by this Court. Thereafter again, similar application was moved and effort was made to get that report on record. The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal has by impugned judgment dated 07.07.2010 rejected revision of the petitioner challenging refusal to accept that Hand writing expert report again on record. The learned counsel contends that the 2 Tahsildar had earlier accepted that report on record and later on has reviewed that order. The Tahsildar does not possess jurisdiction to review and hence the earlier order must stand. Second contention is, report obtained by the petitioner is a document and as the respondent gets an opportunity to cross examine, the report needs to be accepted on record in rebuttal. All these contentions were evaluated in writ petition No. 3941 of 2000. There cannot be any review of orders passed in Writ Petition No. 3941 of 2000 now. The Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal has correctly appreciated the position. There is no jurisdictional error or perversity in the impugned judgment. Writ Petition is, therefore, rejected. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.