(1) wp3257-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3257 OF 2010 Swant Flat Owners Co-op. Housing Society, Vijaynagar & another PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. P.S. Pawar, advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. S.G. Nandedkar, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State. ..... CORAM : M.T. JOSHI, J. DATED : 30th AUGUST, 2011 ORAL ORDER: 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent. 2. The petitioners claim to be aggrieved by the order of remand of the case initiated on the suo-motu Revision by the Superintendent of Land Records. The order of the Superintendent of Land Records came to be quashed and set aside by the Appellate Authority and the same order was confirmed by the Hon'ble Minister. 3. The petitioners in the present Writ (2) wp3257-10 Petition, vide various prayers, in effect, submit that the original entries which were recorded earlier in all the proceedings be restored. In the alternative, vide prayer clause "D", it is submitted that the respondents be directed to conduct survey and take necessary action for finalization of the P.R. Card of the petitioners. 3. It is, however, an admitted fact that the petitioner - Society is not the party to those proceedings. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioner - Cooperative Housing Society is the purchaser of the concerned plots and the Superintendent of Land Records, Aurangabad is not allowing the petitioner to participate in the proceedings. He further submitted that the petitioner had appeared before the said Authority but no application as such for adding the petitioner - Society as party is filed before the Superintendent of Land Records. In view of this, unless and until the petitioner Society gets itself added as a party or is aggrieved by rejection of any such application, no writ petition would be maintainable, since the (3) wp3257-10 petitioners' locus is yet to be decided by the competent Authority. In this view of the matter, the Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged in above terms. No order as to costs. [ M.T. JOSHI ] JUDGE npj/wp3257-10