HANUMANT BHANUDAS KADAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent taken up for hearing and final disposal.

(2.) THIS petition can be disposed of on the short point. What the petitioner had challenged before the State Government was the order dated

(3.) THE short point on which the petitioner must succeed is that if the order of the Commissioner to the extent of the matter being remanded to the Tahsildar was also to be set aside without passing final order in the petitioner's favour then under the proviso to sub-clause 1 to clause 15, the petitioner ought to have been given a reasonable opportunity of stating his case. Admittedly, it was not brought to the petitioner's notice during the pendency of the proceedings before the State Government that not only was his revision likely to be dismissed but even the order of remand was likely to be set aside. The result of the impugned order passed by the Minister is that the petitioner does not have even an opportunity of satisfying the Tahsildar pursuant to the order dated 3rd October, 1994 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune. If the petitioner was not eligible to get a final order in his favour from the State Government, all that could have been done was to dismiss the revision application. But the Minister went further in setting aside the order of the Commissioner without this possibility being indicated to the petitioner.