1 FARAD CONTI NUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD C.R.A. NO. 31/2009 _______________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office } Memoranda of Coram, } Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's } orders or directions } and Registrar's orders } ___________________________}___________________________________ Shri V.B. Patil, Advocate for petitioner. Shri D.V. Tele, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 Shri M.M. Bhorikar, Advocate for respondent no.3 ........................... [CORAM : K.U. CHANDIWAL, J ] DATE : 23rd FEBRUARY, 2010. PER COURT : 1 Heard learned counsel extensively. The matter is finally heard. 2 The controversy relates to the road passing through agricultural field. The respondent no. 2 Dilip Chudaman Patil and Amit Chudaman Patil applied to the learned Tahsildar by application dated 16/11/2007 in respect of making free access to approach their property as adjoining land holders have caused 2 obstruction, enclosing therewith 7/12 extract of adjoining land holders. Learned Tahsildar had conducted inquiry in the matter and ultimately he has directed, in Marathi as under 3 This order was subject to challenge by the original applicant Dilip before learned S.D.O. at Jalgaon. Learned S.D.O. on analyzing factual position found that the spot inspection was carried by learned Tahsildar initially on 22/01/2008 and thereafter on 05/04/2008. The finding recorded by learned Tahsildar in relation to his first spot inspection are not followed by him without assigning any reason and he is more keen to the spot inspection dated 05/04/2008. In doing such exercise, unfortunately learned Tahsildar has not issued notice to the adversely affected persons / owners of the other fields. This incidentally has caused prejudice to the owners of the agricultural property. Procedure followed by learned Tahsildar being foreign to the Mamlatdar’s Act 1906, learned S.D.O. was justified in recalling such order and directing learned Tahsildar to act in terms of Section 5 as per power vested in learned Tahsildar. I do not see any error in the order of learned S.D.O.. 3 Parties will have chance to appear 4 before learned Tahsildar to agitate and address all the grievance which the learned S.D.O. has discussed. Consequently, C.R.A. dismissed. Needless to add, leaned Tahsildar will decide rights of the original applicant Dilip Chudaman Patil independently on its own merit by giving hearing to the respective parties. [K.U. CHANDIWAL, J] tsk/cra31.09