1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7721 OF 2009 Tarabai Dhondi Rajguru and ors .. Petitioners Vs The State of Mah and ors. .. Respondents Mr P.K.Dhakephalkar, Senior Counsel i/b J.G.Aradwad (Reddy), for the petitioners. Mr S.D.Rayrikar, AGP for respondent nos 1 to 4. Mr Arvind Purohit for respondent no.5. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATE : 10/11/2009 PC: 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents waive service. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal at the admission stage itself. 2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 18.8.2009, by which respondent no.1 has dismissed the application filed by respondent no.5 and, while doing so, issued direction to cancel all mutation entries in respect of survey no 129/1/1 admeasuring 2.49.32 Hectors, situated at Yerwada (for T 2 short “the said land”). Respondent no.5 had filed an application for direction to the revenue authority to enter his name as owner/occupier of the said land. The order dated 18.8.2009 indicates that the said land belongs to the Government free from any assessment. Admittedly, the petitioners were not parties to these proceedings. 3. It appears that in view of the order dated 27.9.2006 passed by the Tahasildar (Exhibit-E to the writ petition) mutation entry no.4909 in respect of the said land was effected and names of the petitioners were entered in the record of rights. 4. Mr Dhakephalkar, learned senior counsel for the petitioners, submits that by the impugned order, this mutation entry, bearing no.4909, in favour of the petitioners will also be cancelled by the concerned revenue authority. He, therefore, submits that paragraph 2 of th operative portion of the impugned order, which was passed behind the back of the petitioners, deserves to be set aside. Learned counsel for the respondents could not and did not dispute the submissions of Mr Dhakephalkar. They could not dispute that the petitioners were not parties to the proceedings initiated by respondent no.5 in 3 which the impugned order was passed and that the mutation entry in favour of the petitioners will be cancelled without giving them an opportunity of being heard. In the circumstances, paragraph 2 of the impugned order dated 18.8.2009 deserves to be set aside. Order accordingly. However, this shall not preclude the concerned authority from initiating independent proceedings, if they so desired and advised, for cancellation of mutation entry no 4909 or any other entry in respect of survey no.129 1/1 admeasuring 2.49.32. It is needless to state that if the revenue authority decides to proceed against any mutation entry including M.E. No.4909 in respect of the said land in favour of any individual including the petitioners, they shall follow the due procedure and shall give them an opportunity of being heard and pass order on merits in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made in the impugned order. Rule is accordingly disposed of. No costs. Learned AGP shall bring this order to the notice of respondent no.1, the Collector Pune and the Divisional Commissioner within a period of two weeks from today. (D. B. Bhosale, J.) 4