Dilwale 1 22-WP-2990-16.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 22 WRIT PETITION NO. 2990 OF 2016 Shahodev Raosaheb Maharnor And Others VERSUS The State Of Maharashtra And Others ... Advocate for the Petitioners : Mr. Yuvraj Kakde h/f Mr. Gaware Niteen V. AGP for Respondents: Mr. D. R. Korde Advocate for Respondent No.4 : Mr. Natu Sharad V. ... CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 02.04.2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. 2. The petitioners are assailing the order dated 27/01/2016 passed by the Additional Collector, Beed in Case No.2015/CD/Appeal/CR/50 thereby confirming the order dated 14.08.2015 passed by Tahsildar, Georai in Case No.2014/Jama/2/KAVI. 3. Mr. Kakde holding for Mr. Gaware, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to the application filed by respondent No.4, the Tahsildar directed spot inspection through the Revenue Authorities and a panchanama was prepared. Inviting attention to the said panchanama dated 16.06.2015, it is submitted that there is no specific mention regarding existence of any cartway. On the contrary, it is submitted that due to pendency of proceedings before this Court, final 2026:BHC-AUG:16439 Dilwale 2 22-WP-2990-16.odt decision was not taken, however, the Tahsildar recorded a finding regarding existence of a customary way and obstruction thereof, which is not in consonance with finding given in the panchanama. 4. Mr. Natu, the learned counsel for respondent No.4 supports the impugned orders and submits that the panchanama refers to fencing, from which obstruction to the customary way can be inferred. 5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the panchanama (at page No.29), it appears that there is no clear or specific reference regarding existence of a customary cartway or obstruction thereof. The panchanama rather indicates existence of fencing on the boundaries of the survey numbers. Despite of this, the Tahsildar has recorded a finding regarding existence of the cartway, which is not supported by the material on record. 6. In view of the above, the findings recorded by the Tahsildar and confirmed by the Additional Collector are not sustainable. Hence, the following order is passed : ORDER (i) Writ petition is partly allowed. (ii) The impugned order dated 14.08.2015 passed by Tahsildar, Georai in Case No.2014/Jama/2/KAVI and order dated 27/01/2016 passed by the Additional Collector, Beed in Case No.2015/CD/Appeal/CR/50 are hereby quashed and set aside. Dilwale 3 22-WP-2990-16.odt (iii) The matter is remanded to the Tahsildar, Georai for fresh adjudication. The Tahsildar shall issue notice to all concerned parties, carry out fresh spot inspection, prepare panchanama and decide the proceedings afresh by giving finding upon existence of pathway and obstruction thereto, in accordance with law, within a period of four (4) months from today. (iv) By way of interim arrangement, respondent No.4 is permitted to use the pathway in question. The said arrangement shall continue till the Tahsildar decides the matter afresh. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE