AJIT MAHADEV PATIL AND ANOTHER v. THE DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER PUNE DIVISION AND OTHERS
IA/11292/2025 · 2025-12-05
Shri S G Chapalgaonkar
Review Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 74643 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 74643 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
57 - IA - 11292 - 2025 .doc VRJ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO.11292 OF 2025 IN REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.30358 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.11381 OF 2025 Ajit Mahadev Patil & Anr. … Applicants V/s. The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune & Ors. … Respondents WITH REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.30358 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO.11381 OF 2025 Ajit Mahadev Patil & Anr. … Petitioners V/s. The Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, Pune & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Dilip Bodake with Mr. Amar P. Dhumal, Ms. Sujata Lohar and Mr. Viraj P. Dhumal for the applicant/petitioner. Mr. Paras Yadav i/by Sangram Patil for respondent No.3. Mr. J. P. Patil, AGP for the State. CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J. DATED : DECEMBER 5, 2025 1 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Digitally signed by VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2025.12.08 15:23:49 +0530
57 - IA - 11292 - 2025 .doc P.C.:
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.11292 OF 2025
1. Heard learned advocate appearing for respective parties.
2. For the reasons as stated in interim application, the application is allowed.
3. Delay of 16 days caused in filing review application is condoned.
4. Review application be registered.
REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO.30358 OF 2025
5. Mr. Bodake, learned advocate appearing for petitioner, points out that on 24th September 2025, writ petition was withdrawn under misconception of law that an alternate remedy was available to petitioner. After withdrawal of writ petition, the petitioner approached Mantralaya by filing a revision. However, it has been pointed out that since order passed under Section 16 of Maharashtra Village Panchayats Act, 1959 by Revisional Commissioner has attained finality, the revision application would not be maintainable. He has also placed on record a copy of circular dated 18th September 2008 in support of his contention. 2
57 - IA - 11292 - 2025 .doc
6. Learned advocate appearing for respondent would not dispute aforesaid contention.
7. In that view of the matter, review petition is allowed.
8. Writ Petition No.11381 of 2025 is restored to its original position.
9. Place writ petition on 9th December 2025, under the caption
“for admission”.
(S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.) 3