SHANKAR BHAURAO ZADE Vs. VINOD SHRIHARI ZADE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The writ petition is heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(2.) By this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged concurrent orders passed by the Tahsildar (Mamlatdar) and SubDivisional Officer under the provisions of Mamlatdars' Courts Act, 1906. By an order dtd. 13/11/2020, the Tahsildar allowed an application filed by the respondent under the provisions of the said Act and directed that the respondent be granted access way from the dhura of Gat Nos.12, 13, 15 and 16 to access his agricultural field in Gat No.14. The Sub-Divisional Officer dismissed the revision application filed by the petitioners and thereby, confirmed the order passed by the Tahsildar.

(3.) Mr. Rathod, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the orders passed by the Tahsildar as well as the Sub-Divisional Officer, are without jurisdiction, for the reason that the nature of relief sought by the respondent in the facts of the present case, could not be said to be relatable to the provisions of the said Act. It was submitted that a proper appreciation of the application filed by the respondent would show that, in real terms, the respondent was seeking direction for a new access way to be granted to him in view of the fact that the earlier access, which he was using to reach his agricultural field, was blocked, due to certain events. It was submitted that under the provisions of the said Act, the applicant was necessarily required to prove that there was an existing access way, which was blocked by the non-applicants before the Tahsildar (Mamlatdar), so that the said Authority could exercise the power of injuncting such non-applicant from creating obstruction. In the present case, according to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the admitted facts did not demonstrate such a situation and that, therefore, notwithstanding the spot inspection report on record, the Authorities under the said Act ought not to have exercised jurisdiction.