1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8100 OF 2010 Sadashiv s/o. Devram Roham and another .. Petitioner Versus Tushar s/o. Venunath Gadhave and others. .. Respondents --- Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for the petitioner, CORAM : D.B. BHOSALE, J. DATE : 19TH JANUARY, 2011 PER COURT :- 1] Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. 2] This petition is arising from the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities in R.T.S. Proceedings. Hence, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned orders in writ jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 3] The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that 2 Civil Appeal ( No. 143/2006) arising from the judgment and order passed by the trial court in R.C.S. No. 293/2004, is pending. He further submits that in view of the mutation entry effected in pursuance of the order passed by the Commissioner, the respondent is likely to create third party interest in the suit property. 4] In my opinion, it is open to the petitioners to file an application for appropriate interim relief in the appeal. Keeping that remedy open to the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of. The appellate court shall decide the Regular Civil Appeal on merits, in accordance with law and uninfluenced by the observations made in these proceedings by the revenue authorities. It is open to the parties to approach the revenue authorities afresh, after the civil rights of the parties are finally adjudicated in the aforementioned civil proceedings. 5] With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] grt/