MAHEBOOBKHA RAHEMANKHA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of parties.

(2.) The petitioner is assailing the judgment and order dtd. 25/7/2013 passed in Revision Petition No.2B/2008/H by Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Aurangabad (henceforth 'MRT' for short). As a result of dismissal of the Revision Petition before the MRT, the order dtd. 30/6/1986 passed by the Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Parbhani, in two appeals filed by the respondents under Sec. 38-E(1) and 38-E(i) Explanation of the Hyderabad Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereinafter 'the Act of 1950' for short) has been confirmed. Therefore, the petitioner is challenging the orders passed by the MRT as well as the respondent No. 2 i.e. Deputy Collector (Land Reforms), Parbhani. The appeals filed by the respondents herein have been allowed and the declaration of ownership under Sec. 38-E and Order under Sec. 38-E(i) Explanation of the Act of 1950 passed on 30/6/1986 has been canceled.

(3.) Learned Advocate Mr. Dalal appearing for petitioner submits that though initially, writ petition was filed by the legal heirs i.e. son of original protected tenant Mehboob Khan Rehman Khan, however, during the pendency of the present writ petition, the original petitioner has expired and the present writ petition is now being pursued by the legal heirs of Mehboob Khan Rehman Khan. Similarly, during the pendency of the writ petition, one civil application seeking intervention in the writ petition has been filed by the subsequent purchasers of the land in question. Vide order dtd. 17/1/2023, this Court has allowed the intervention application and accordingly, amendment has been carried out and they have been added as Respondents No. 16 to 22 in the present writ petition.