GYANDAS DAMA LADE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition by the non-tribal transferee is directed against the order dated 30th June, 1985, passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal affirming the order passed by the Additional Tahsildar, Sakoli, on 15th October, 1983, reviewing his own earlier order, dated 23rd September, 1980 by which possession of only half of the land was restored to the respondent No. 2 and directed, on review, to restore the entire land of one-acre to the respondent No. 2 who was a tribal as he belonged to the Gond tribe.

(2.) Though several challenges were raised to the order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, the only point urged by Shri Badiye the learned Counsel for the petitioners, was that once having passed the order, dated 23rd September, 1980, the Additional Tahsildar, Sakoli, could not have reviewed his own order and passed the order dated 15th October, 1983, restoring the whole of the land, which had transferred by the respondent No. 2 to the petitioner by the sale-deed dated 21st April, 1970.

(3.) It is common ground that in the instant case the Additional Tahsildar was exercising the powers of the Collector and, therefore, he could pass the order under section 3 of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Schedule Tribes Act, 1974 (the Restoration Act for short). According to Shri Badiye, the Restoration Act enacts a complete Code for the purposes of filling appeals or revisions and prescribes the forums to which the appeals or revisions would lie, while section 9 thereof brings finality to the decision or order of Collector and decision of Revenue Tribunal Since none of the provisions of the Restoration Act expressly confers right of review on any of the authorities, it was not permissible to Additional Tahsildar to review his own order, dated 23rd September, 1980, granting restoration of only half of the land and, later on 15th October, 1983 and by reviewing the earlier order to restore the whole of the land to the respondent No. 2.