1 wp7598-10 vai IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7598 OF 2010 Ashok Ganesh Kondilkar ....Petitioner V/s. The Divisional Commissioner & Ors. ....Respondents Mr.R.P. Lote for the Petitioner. Mr.S.R. Nargolkar, Addl. G.P. for Respondent No.4. Mr.S.V. Deshmukh for Respondent Nos.5 to 8. CORAM : MOHIT S. SHAH, C.J. AND S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. TUESDAY, 18TH JANUARY 2011 P.C. :- 1. Heard. The learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to place on record a copy of the notice dated 3.1.2011 of the Sub Divisional Officer, Panvel Division, Panvel, calling upon the petitioner to appear on 18.1.2011 i.e. today at 11.00 a.m. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the notice has been issued for reviewing the order dated 5.4.2010, passed by the Tahsildar, in respect of the land in question. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the said notice has been issued on the basis of 2 wp7598-10 the impugned circular dated 16.8.2010. The learned counsel also seeks to raise various contentions. 3. The learned Additional Government Pleader submits that the Sub Divisional Officer, Panvel has not passed any order but has merely issued the notice, calling upon the petitioner to remain present and to produce the necessary documents at the hearing for review of the order dated 5.4.2010 at Exhibit “H” to the petition. It is submitted that the petition is therefore pre-mature. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Sub Divisional Officer, Panvel has purported to act on the basis of the impugned circular dated 16.8.2010, issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Konkan, the petitioner will not be able to challenge the said circular before the Sub Divisional Officer, Panvel. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that since the Sub Divisional Officer, Panvel has merely issued the notice for reviewing the order dated 5.4.2010, it is open to the petitioner, without prejudice to his rights and contentions including those raised in this petition to answer the same, to submit that the order dated 5.4.2010 does not warrant any review. 5. In case the Sub Divisional Officer, Panvel does not accept the petitioner’s submission and reviews the order dated 5.4.2010 or passes any orders adverse to the petitioner’s interest, it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the said adverse order before appropriate forum and at that time, the petitioner will also be at liberty to challenge the said circular dated 16.8.2010. 6. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of as pre-mature 3 wp7598-10 subject to the above observations and the liberty granted to the petitioner. CHIEF JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, J.