-: 1 :- wp-2069/11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2069 OF 2011 Ratanchand H. Baldota Deceased Through L.Rs. ..Petitioner. Versus Sub Divisinal Officer & Ors. ..Respondents. Mr. P. G. Karande for the petitioner. Ms. Bobby Malhotra Paul for R-2A to 2C. Mr. I. A. Patel, AGP for 1 & 3. Coram : RANJIT MORE, J. Date : March 22, 2011. P. C. : 1. Heard learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The petitioner by filing this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order dated 1st November 2010 passed by Respondent no.1, whereby he has allowed 2nd respondent’s appeal and directed the Tehsildar, Borivali to fix the purchase price of the suit land in favour of respondent no.2 under section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. 3. Admittedly, the aforesaid order is revisable under section 76 of the BT&AL Act and it is also appealable under section 6 of the Maharashtra Restoration of Land to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974. srp -: 2 :- wp-2069/11 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is no Presiding Officer in MRT and therefore he has filed this writ petition. 5. In order to understand what is the progress in the matter of appointment of Presiding Officer in MRT and in view of flooding of petitions before this Court due to vacancy in MRT, when I called upon Mr. Patel, learned AGP to make a statement, he submitted that the proposal for appointment of President of MRT is pending with the Law & Judiciary Department, Government of Maharashtra and decision in this regard will be taken very shortly. In view of flood of petitions before this Court due to vacancy in MRT, the State Government is directed to expedite the matter of filling up of the posts of Presiding Officer of MRT. 6. Coming back to the present petition, Ms. Malhotra, learned counsel for respondent no.1 submitted that the present petition can be disposed of by protecting the petitioner’s interest till the vacancy of Presiding Officer in MRT is filled-in. 7. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, in my opinion, this petition can be disposed of by passing following order. -: O R D E R :- (I) The effect, implementation and operation of the impugned order dated 1/11/2010 passed by respondent no.1 in DLN/ -: 3 :- wp-2069/11 Restoration/16/853/91/2008, which is annexed at Exhibit-J to petition shall remain stayed till the filling up of vacancy of Presiding Officer of MRT, Mumbai. It shall further remain stayed for the period of two weeks from the date of such appointment of Presiding Officer. (II) It is made clear that this Court has not gone into merits of the case and all the points and contentions are kept open. (RANJIT MORE, J.)