32-WP-8306-16+.doc Sayali IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8306 OF 2016 WITH INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6333 OF 2026 Bhamabai Bapusaheb Bhosale … Petitioners V/s. The Sub Divisional Officer, Baramati and Others … Respondents Mr. Graham Francis i/b Mr. V. S. Talkute , for Petitioner. CORAM : AMIT BORKAR, J. DATED : AUGUST 31, 2026 P.C.: 1. The Petitioner impugns an order passed by the SDO in exercise of power under the Provisions of the Maharashtra Agricultural (Maharashtra Agricultural Ceiling of Holdings Amendment) Act, 2011. 2. By virtue of the impugned order dated 22nd February, 2013, the SDO passed an order returning the land to the land holders stated in the order. The Petitioner’s grievance is that along with the persons in whose favour, the re-allotment is done, the petitioners have a right, title and interest in the said land, which fact was not considered by the SDO. 1 SAYALI DEEPAK UPASANI Digitally signed by SAYALI DEEPAK UPASANI Date: 2026.08.31 14:52:30 +0530 32-WP-8306-16+.doc 3. In my opinion, the petitioners’ claim of right, title and interest over the land in question, i.e. Gat No. 377 (part) and 378 (part) at Village Kalamb, the appropriate remedy for them is to establish their right, title and interest by a civil suit against the persons in whose favour, the impugned order is passed. 4. The petition is therefore, dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to institute a civil suit to establish their right, title and interest over the property stated above. 5. All questions related to the right, title and interest over the property, of the petitioners and respondents, are kept open to be agitated before the Civil Court in the civil suit proposed to be filed by the petitioners. INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6333 OF 2026 6. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘a’. 7. Necessary amendment is to be carried out forthwith. (AMIT BORKAR, J.) 2