14.WP.8981.2017.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 8981 OF 2017 Sushila Badhu Patil ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents *** Mr. Chaudhari S.U., Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. D. S. Jape, AGP for Respondent – State. *** CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : APRIL 08, 2026 PER COURT : 1. Heard Mr. Choudhari, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is challenging the order dated 31st January 2014, passed by Additional Collector, Nandurbar in RTS/Appeal No.20 of 2011, whereby the appeal filed by respondent No.7 came to be allowed and the order dated 10th January 2017 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik in RTS/Revision No.142 of 2014, whereby the revision application filed by the petitioner came to be rejected. 3. The petitioner is having an alternate and equally efficacious remedy against the order passed by the Additional Shrikant Malani 2026:BHC-AUG:15711 14.WP.8981.2017.odt Commissioner, Nashik, to file a revision before the State Government and this issue is already considered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the matter of Gurudassing Nawoosing Panjwani Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.1 4. In view thereof, I am not inclined to interfere in the present writ petition on the ground of having an alternate remedy. Hence, writ petition is disposed of. 5. The petitioner may file second revision before the State Government within a period of eight weeks. Delay in prosecuting the present writ petition shall be taken into consideration by revisional authority while considering the application for condonation of delay. ( SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. ) 1 2015 AIR SCW 6277 Shrikant Malani