1 wp 6783.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6783 OF 2011 Rameshchandra Jagannath Soni and another .. Petitioners Versus Sharad Trimbak Dande and others .. Respondents Shri R. F. Totala, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. B. Pulkundwar, A.G.P. for the Respondent/State. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 08 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011. PER COURT : . Heard Shri Totala, the learned counsel for petitioners. The petitioners assail the order passed by the Deputy Director of Land Records, Aurangabad purportedly invoking its jurisdiction U/Sec. 257 r/w Sec. 255 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code. 2. Shri Totala, the learned counsel submits that, though the alternate remedy is available to the petitioners U/Sec. 257 of the M. L. R. Code, the same is not an efficacious remedy. The 2 wp 6783.11 learned counsel relies on the judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in a case of Nagpur Distillers, Nagpur Vs. The State of Maharashtra reported in 2007 (2) Mh. L. J. 285. The learned counsel contends that the order is passed on the basis of compromise decree to which the petitioners were not party. The Deputy Director could not have exercised the jurisdiction. The learned counsel relies on the various documents filed on record. 3. All these submissions are based on factual aspects. The judgment in the case of Nagpur Distillers referred supra of the learned Single Judge of this Court, dealt with the case, wherein the learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the peculiar questions raised in the petition could be more conveniently answered by the High Court and in that context had exercised the jurisdiction though alternate remedy was available. 4. Rule of alternate remedy is a rule of self restraint. To invoke the revisional jurisdiction, the petitioners are not required to deposit the amount. The case would be based more on appreciation of factual matrix. In the light of the above, I am not inclined to entertain the present writ petition, in view of the 3 wp 6783.11 alternate remedy available. 5. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of with liberty to the petitioners to avail alternate remedy. The authority shall consider the time lost in prosecuting the present writ petition. No costs. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Sept. 11