1 WP7023-26 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 7023/2026 (SATYANARAYAN SWAROOPNARAYAN KHANDELWAL VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, YAVATMAL & OTHERS) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ms S.S. Dhone, counsel for the petitioner. Shri J.N. Ghurde, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents. CORAM : RAJ D. WAKODE, J. DATE : SEPTEMBER 15, 2026. Heard Ms S.S. Dhone, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. The petitioner seeks challenge to the order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the Tahsildar (Revenue), Yavatmal thereby rejecting the application of the petitioner for conversion of his land from Class-II to Class-I occupancy. The reason for which such application is rejected is revealed from the impugned order wherein the learned Tahsildar has recorded that since the petitioner was allotted land under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the aforesaid Act’), there is no provision for conversion of such land from Class-II to Class-I occupancy. 3. Ms S.S. Dhone, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the learned Tahsildar had committed an error in law in not referring to Section 29A of the aforesaid Act which was inserted by Maharashtra Act No.6 of 2024 with effect from 19.01.2024 wherein a specific provision has been included thereby permitting conversion of such lands allotted under Section 27 of the aforesaid Act if the conditions prescribed under Section 29A of the aforesaid Act are satisfied. 2026:BHC-NAG:12365 2 WP7023-26 4. Shri J.N. Ghurde, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents does not dispute this position as regards the amendment in the aforesaid Act thereby including Section 29A in the aforesaid Act for conversion of occupancy of land granted under Section 27 of the aforesaid Act. It is not disputed that the petitioner was allotted the land in question under Section 27 of the aforesaid Act. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that such allotment is made in the year 1991 and the petitioner has not breached any of the conditions thereby providing for continuation of such allotment in favour of the petitioner. 6. The sole ground on which the application submitted by the petitioner is rejected by the respondent no.2-Tahsildar is non-availability of the provisions for such conversion. However, in view of such amendment of the year 2024 thereby providing Section 29A for conversion of occupancy of land granted under Section 27 of the aforesaid Act, the impugned order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the respondent no.2-Tahsildar (Revenue) is unsustainable in law. In view of above, I see no reason as to why this writ petition should not be allotted. Accordingly, the following order is passed:- I. The impugned order dated 03.11.2025 passed by the respondent no.2-Tahsildar (Revenue), Yavatmal which is at Record Page No.21, Annexure-E thereby rejecting the application dated 08.09.2025 submitted by the petitioner for conversion of occupancy of his land from Class-II to Class-I is hereby quashed and set aside. 3 WP7023-26 II. The aforesaid application dated 08.09.2025 is restored back to the files of the respondent no.2-Tahsildar (Revenue), Yavatmal and the respondent no.2 is directed to decide the aforesaid application on its own merits and in accordance with law and more specifically in view of the conditions as laid down under Section 29A of the aforesaid Act. III. The aforesaid application shall be decided within a period of eight weeks from the date of production of this order before the said Authority. The decision taken thereupon shall be communicated to the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of such decision. 7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of in above terms. No order as to costs. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) APTE Signed by: Apte Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 17/09/2026 16:09:06