Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

april 2026

Bombay High Court · 2026-04-02

VINAYAK VASUDEV TILAK DEC THR LRS vs THR STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR TAHSILDAR AND ORS

Citation / case number
WP/12671/2024
Court
Bombay High Court
Petitioner
VINAYAK VASUDEV TILAK DEC THR LRS
Respondent
THR STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR TAHSILDAR AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

909-J-(2)-WP-6128-2024+(1).doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Digitally signed by CHAITANYA WRIT PETITION NO. 6128 OF 2024 CHAITANYA ASHOK ASHOK JADHAV JADHAV Date: 2026.04.10 18:39:04 +0530 Vinayak Vasudev Tilak Decd. …Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra Thr. Tahsildar And Ors. …Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12642 OF 2024 WITH WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 10666 OF 2024 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12671 OF 2024 Mr. Narayan G. Rokade a/w Mrunmai K. Rokade, Siddharth Ghodke, Swapnil Kalokhe, Ankita Ugalmugale, Tribhuvan Sharma, Ramchandra Wagh, for the Petitioner in WP/6128/2024 with WP/12671/2024. Adv. S. G. Karandikar a/w Shashank Mangle, Harshad Sathe, Saurabh Butala, Aishwarya Hinge, Manvi Sharma, Shubham Gangan, Siddesh Bane and Pranil Vichare, for the Respondent Nos.3, and 11 to 14 in WP/6128/2024 and for Respondent Nos. 1, 3 to 6 in WP/12642/2024. Ms. Sulbha Chipade, Addl. G. P. for the State, in WP/1267/2024. Mr. P. V. Nelson Rajan, Addl. G .P. for the State in WP/6128/2024. Mr. Bapusaheb Dahiphale, Addl. G .P. for the State in WP/10666/204. Ms. S. R. Crasto, Addl. G .P. for the State in WP/12642/2024 Page 1 of 10 April 2, 2026 This Judgement is modified/corrected pursuant to the speaking to the minute of order dated 10/04/2026. Chaitanya 909-J-(2)-WP-6128-2024+(1).doc CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : APRIL 2, 2026 Oral Judgement: 1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith by consent of the parties, and is taken up for final hearing. Context and Factual Background: 2. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to an order dated November 30, 2023, passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal (“MRT”), which allowed a revision sought by the Respondents, reversing an order of the Collector, which had held the Petitioners to b

VINAYAK VASUDEV TILAK DEC THR LRS vs THR STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR TAHSILDAR AND ORS · Niyam