-: 1 :- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7796 OF 2011 Kishan Nathu Ghutiya. ..Petitioner. Versus Union of India & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. Bhavesh Parmar i/b Sandhya A. Mailagir, A. Shukla and Jatin Sheth for the petitioner. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : September 30, 2011. P. C. : 1. Heard Mr. Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenges the order passed by the Administrator in Revenue Appeal No.6 of 2008. The petitioner by filing said appeal before the Administrator challenged the order of LRO. The petitioner’s appeal was dismissed on two grounds; firstly, that appeal will lie to the Collector under the provisions of section 44 of DNH Land Reforms Regulations, 1971, and; secondly, appeal is filed after the delay of 31 years. 2. The short grievance of Mr. Parmar is that learned Administrator having held that he has no jurisdiction, he could not have gone into merits of the matter. I find substance in srp -: 2 :- the submission of Mr. Parmar. The petition is therefore disposed of by passing following order. -: O R D E R :- (a) The petitioner is granted liberty to file appropriate proceedings challenging the order of LRO before the competent authority (b) In the event, petitioner files appropriate proceedings before the competent authority, same shall be decided by the competent authority independently, on its own merits and in accordance with law. (c) Needless to mention that the competent authority shall not be influenced by the observations made in the impugned order by the Administrator. (RANJIT MORE, J.)