SHRIDHAR RAMCHANDRA BHOGALE Vs. DILIP BAPU PANDIT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. In view of limited nature of the controversy, rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally at the stage of admission.

(2.) The challenge in these petitions is to the judgment and order dated 17th February 2017 passed by the learned Member (Administrative), Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai in Review Application Nos.6 of 2016, 7 of 2016 and 8 of 2016, whereby the learned Member was persuaded to dispose of the review applications on the premise that the learned Member, who had passed the judgment and order of which the review was sought, ceased to be a Member of the Tribunal. The learned Member referred to Regulation 37 of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal Regulations 2013 and found himself constrained to entertain the review applications, as Shri J.P. Dange, the then Member (Administrative), who has passed the order in Tenancy Revision Application No.119 of 2014, 120 of 2014 and 121 of 2014 on 7th May 2016, ceased to hold office as a Member of the Tribunal.

(3.) In the backdrop of the order passed by the learned Member, the reference to the facts in all the petitions is not warranted except to note the circumstances in which the review petitions came to be filed. The petitioner claims that a certificate under section 32M of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 ('The Act, 1948'), came to be issued to him in the year 1962 pursuant to an order passed by ALT in Tenancy Case No.154 of 1962. After a period of about 51 years, the petitioner asserts, the respondents filed an appeal, being Tenancy Appeal No.13 of 2013, before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kankavali, which came to be dismissed. The respondents carried the matter in revision in Revision Application No. TNC/RTN/121/2014. By judgment and order dated 7 th May 2016, the learned Member, MRT was persuaded to allow the revision application preferred by the respondent.