:1: :1: :1: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.726 OF 2006 Abdul Dadamiya Shaikh .. Petitioner. Vs. Vijay Jagannath Rathi & Ors. .. Respondents. Mr.N.J.Patil for the petitioner. Mr.R.D.Soni for the respondents. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE, J. DATED : 11TH MARCH, 2008. DATED : 11TH MARCH, 2008. DATED : 11TH MARCH, 2008. P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties taken up for final hearing. Mr.Soni, learned counsel waives service for the respondents. 3. This petition arises from the orders passed by the authorities below in the proceedings initiated at the instance of the respondent-landlord under section 32P of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (for short "the Act"). A basic challenge to the order dated 9th August, 2005 passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nasik Division, Nasik is on the ground that the order is without jurisdiction. Mr.Soni, learned counsel for the respondents, at the outset, fairly conceeded that the :2: :2: :2: order of the Commissioner is without jurisdiction and has agreed for setting aside the said order. He then invited my attention to the orders passed by the authorities below, namely, the order dated 7th February, 2003 and the order of the Sub Divisional Officer dated 20.3.2004 and contended that the proceedings under section 32-P will have to be decided on merits. 4. I perused both the orders. It appears that the Tahsildar vide order dated 7.2.2003 had rejected the application filed by the respondent-landlord, by which the landlord sought to initiate proceedings under section 32P, on the ground that the respondents did not produce the relevant material before him. That order was carried by the respondents in appeal and the appellate authority, that is, S.D.O., remanded the matter with directions to the Tahsildar to decide the proceedings under section 32P on merits in accordance with law and after giving an opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned. It is thus clear that the basic challenge was to the order dated 7.2.2003 passed by the Tahsildar who had rejected the application filed by the respondent for initiating the proceedings under section 32P solely on the ground that the respondents did not produce the documents before him. :3: :3: :3: 5. From bare perusal of the provisions contained in section 32P, it is clear that where the purchase of any land by tenant under section 32 becomes ineffective under section 32G or 32M or where a tenant fails to exercise the right to purchase the land held by him within the specified period under section 32F, the tribunal may "suo motu" or "on an application made on this behalf" direct that the land shall be disposed of in the manner provided in sub-section (2) of section 32P of the Act. Keeping this provision in view, in my opinion, the Tahsildar, in the present case, ought to have granted further opportunity to the respondents to produce the relevant papers or suo motu called for record and proceedings and proceeded further to take the proceedings under section 32P to its logical conclusion. Having failed to do so the Sub Divisional Officer had rightly remanded the matter with such directions to the Tahsildar. Thus, instead of entering into technicalities, I am satisfied the following order shall meet the ends of justice: . The petition is partly allowed. The order passed by the Divisional Commissioner dated 9th August, 2005 is quashed and set aside. The order passed by the Sub Divisional Officer dated 20.3.2004 :4: :4: :4: is confirmed. The Tahsildar is, accordingly, directed to initiate the proceedings under section 32P of the Act and shall conclude the same expeditiously. The parties are directed to co-operate for disposal of the proceedings under section 32P expeditiously. Mr.Soni, learned counsel for the respondents submits that he shall produce all the documents before the Tahsildar within two weeks from the date of receipt of this order. The parties are directed to produce a copy of this order before the Tahsildar within three weeks from today. While allowing this petition I shall not be understood to have expressed any opinion on merits of the case. All contentions of the parties on merits are kept open. The writ petition is disposed of. (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.) (D.B.BHOSALE, J.)