*1* wp.4528.11.930.sxw kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4528 OF 2011 Samrao Raoji Palkar and others. ..Petitioners ­Versus­ Saraswati Bhau Palkar and others. ..Respondents .......... Mr.S.R.Ganbavale, for the Petitioners. Mr.A.Y.Sakhare, Senior Advocate with Mr.Vishwajeet Mohite, for the Respondent Nos.2, 3A to 3G, 4 and 5. Mr.S.N.Bhosale, AGP, for the Respondent No.6. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date : 09th August, 2011. P.C.: 1 The Petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 31.05.2011 passed in Revision Application No.RTS/KO/496/2010 by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune. It appears that there was regular civil suit filed in the civil court for partition and separate possession and that suit came to be decreed and the appeal therefrom came to be dismissed by the District Court and even the second appeal has been also dismissed by this Court. Thereupon, an application was made for effecting the partition of the agricultural lands and that application was before the Tahasildar who in turn forwarded it to the Taluka Inspector of Land Records for effecting the partition. The Tahasildar approved the partition as forwarded by the T.I.L.R.. Against that order of the Tahasildar dated 18.02.2009, an appeal was carried before the Sub­Divisional Officer, that has been rejected by his order dated 31.10.2009. Thereafter, the matter was taken before the Additional Collector, Kolhapur who dismissed the same by *2* wp.4528.11.930.sxw order dated 17.08.2010. Thereafter, the revision was preferred before the Additional Commissioner and it is argued that all throughout the proceedings the heirs of deceased Krishna Bhau Palkar were on record, however, inadvertently the Petitioners failed to mention the legal heirs of the deceased Krishna Palkar in the memo of revision filed before the Additional Commissioner. On that technical ground, the revision application has been dismissed. That is why this Writ Petition. 2 After having heard the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr.Sakhare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the contesting Respondents, I am of the opinion that bearing in mind the nature of the proceedings, the interest of justice would be served if the impugned order is set aside. The Commissioner to now proceed on the basis that the revision memo stands amended as pointed out by the Petitioners’ counsel vide page 29 of the petition paper book. Therefore, the heirs and legal representatives of the deceased Krishna Palkar who have accepted the notice during the proceedings, will now be allowed to appear in terms of their description in the memo of this Writ Petition. Therefore, all parties to the proceedings shall now be heard by the Commissioner on merits and he will pass a reasoned order uninfluenced by his earlier order within a period of eight weeks from today. The parties to appear before the Commissioner on 24th August, 2011. All contentions of both sides are kept open. The Writ Petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)