1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7342 OF 2008 Baburao s/o Abarao Sawant and ors. ..PETITIONERS. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and ors. ..RESPONDENTS. Shri B.S. Kudale, Advocate for the petitioners Shri N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for respondent No.3,6 and7. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J : DATE : 6th JULY, 2009. PER COURT : 1. From the perusal of the order, it would reveal that the respondent No.1 has given cogent and sound reasons for allowing revision. 2. The Honourable Minister has found that the application was filed after a period of 27 years. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Dattu Appa Patil since deceased by L.Rs. Ananda Dattu Patil and others vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2007 (1) Mh.L.J. has held that “ variation made after 27 years without any error or irregularity in thescheme – application for variation was made after about 27 years which is not a reasonable period – Exercise of powers by Consolidation Officer after 27 years is totally unjustified.” 3. In that view of the matter, no case is made out for interference in the impugned order. Hence rejected. In any case, it is not in dispute that the suit is pending between the parties, with respect to the same land. The parties can very well got their rights adjudicated by the Civil Court of competent jurisdiction. ( B. R. GAVAI, J. ) aaa/wp7342.08 ***