47-WP-10889-2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10889 OF 2026 Ramesh Pandurang Khishmatrao Decd Through LH ..Petitioner Versus Anil Narayan Jadhav and Ors …Respondents Mr. S. G. Karandikar, with Milind Parab, Rajendra J Gawade and Sumit Khopkar, i/b Milind Parab and Associates, for the Petitioner. CORAM: N. J. JAMADAR, J. DATE : 24th AUGUST 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner. 2. The challenge in this Petition is to an order dated 17th July 2026, whereby the learned President, Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, Mumbai, has remanded the Appeal No. 142 of 2024, for afresh decision to the Sub-Divisional Officer. 3. The apprehension of Mr. Karandikar is that the decision post remand would be restricted to the observations which precede the operative order in paragraph 16 of the impugned order. It is true in paragraph 16, the learned President, MRT, has directed the SDO to examine the purported implications of the Government Resolution No. ARS 1/2 ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Digitally signed by ARUN RAMCHANDRA SANKPAL Date: 2026.08.26 09:27:50 +0530 47-WP-10889-2026.DOC 552/1949, dated 27th February 1950, qua Section 14 of the Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. However, post remand, the entire matter would be open for adjudication before the SDO. 4. Subject to the aforesaid clarification, which is evident from the Clause (2) of the impugned operative order itself, the Petition stands disposed. [N. J. JAMADAR, J.] ARS 2/2