1 38 WP 676-2022.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 38 WRIT PETITION NO. 676 OF 2022 BHAUSAHEB BALAJI PATOLE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS … Mr. Hemant U. Dhage – Advocate for Petitioner Mr. K.B. Jadhavar – AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3, State … CORAM : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J. DATE : 08.12.2025 PER COURT : 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3, State Authorities. 2. The petitioner challenges the order dated 30.11.2021 passed by respondent No.3, the Tahsildar, Rahuri, whereby it directed that the name of State Government be recorded. 3. I have gone through the order passed by the learned Tahsildar. On perusal of the order, it transpires that the petitioner had not submitted any reply to the show–cause notice dated 30.08.2021. The learned Tahsildar, without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, passed the impugned order. Therefore, there is a clear violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, it is appropriate to set aside the order 2025:BHC-AUG:34161 2 38 WP 676-2022.odt dated 30.11.2021 passed by respondent No.3, the Tahsildar, Rahuri and remand the matter to the Tahsildar, Rahuri, for fresh consideration. 4. In view thereof, the petition is partly allowed. The order dated 30.11.2021 passed by respondent No.3, the Tahsildar, Rahuri is quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the learned Tahsildar, Rahuri, for fresh consideration. 5. The petitioner shall submit a reply to the show–cause notice dated 30.08.2021. After receipt of the reply from the petitioner, the learned Tahsildar shall pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ] JUDGE Pooja Kale/