1 wp 4142.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4142 OF 2011 Omkar Somnath Modi .. Petitioner Versus Uttareshwar Omkar Modi and another .. Respondents Shri V. D. Salunke, Advocate for the Petitioner. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 15TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT : . The petitioner assails the order of the Member of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal remanding the matter back to the Additional Tahsildar. Shri Salunke, the learned counsel submits that in view of the finding already arrived at by the Tahsildar after appreciation of evidence, the revisional authority was not justified in remanding the matter. Even before the civil proceeding, the fact of tenancy was admitted and in view of admission also no further enquiry is necessary. According to the learned counsel the powers of remand are not to be exercised in casual manner. No purpose would be served by remanding the 2 wp 4142.11 matter back to the Tahsildar. 2. The revisional authority has observed that the Deputy Collector did not agree with the finding of Tahsildar. The revenue record is also discussed. The revisional authority has not decided the matter on merits. But has directed the Tahsildar to rehear the case in accordance with law expeditiously. No prejudice will be caused to the petitioner. In view of above, I do not see any reason to interfere in the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition is according dismissed, however, with no order as to costs. [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/June 11