Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dhananjay Deoram Jadhav, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad seeking a direction to the Tahsildar to review his own orders and set aside mutation entries that recorded lis pendens. The petitioner had made a representation dated 23.03.2023 to the Tahsildar requesting such review. The State opposed the petition, arguing that merely filing a representation does not entitle the petitioner to a direction for review, and that seeking review by the Tahsildar of his own mutation entries is impermissible. The court examined the scope of a Writ of Mandamus, noting that it is issued when an officer refuses to exercise jurisdiction vested by law, and serves as a command to compel exercise of that jurisdiction. The court referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Naresh Kumar and Others v. Government (NCT of Delhi) (2019) 9 SCC 416, which held that review is not an inherent power and can be exercised only when the statute expressly or by necessary implication provides for it. In the absence of such provision, review of judicial or quasi-judicial orders is ultra vires and without jurisdiction. The court also cited its own decision in Sureshsing s/o Sattarsingh Girase v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2021) 6 Mh.L.J. 617, which reiterated that review power is a creation of statute and cannot be exercised without express provision. Applying these principles, the court held that the Tahsildar had no power to review his own mutation entries, and therefore no mandamus could be issued to compel such review. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Writ of Mandamus - Scope - Mandamus is issued to compel an officer to exercise jurisdiction vested by law, not to direct review of own orders without statutory authority - Held that a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct a Tahsildar to review his own mutation entries when no power of review is conferred by statute (Paras 4-7). B) Administrative Law - Power of Review - Not Inherent - Review is not an inherent power; it can be exercised only when the statute expressly or by necessary implication provides for it - In the absence of such provision, exercise of review power is ultra vires, illegal, and without jurisdiction (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Writ of Mandamus can be issued to direct a Tahsildar to review his own mutation entries in the absence of a statutory provision conferring power of review.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Writ of Mandamus
- Review power not inherent
- Statutory authority cannot review own orders without express provision
- Mutation entries
- Lis pendens
