Judgment : Oral Judgment: Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Petition is finally heard at the stage of admission as the notice of final disposal was issued to the respondents by an order dated 16.2.2009. 2. The petitioners were the original applicants before the Mamlatdar. They have pleaded that they had a right of way through field of respondent no.3. The Mamlatdar had conducted necessary enquiry and by the impugned order dated 29.12.2007 granted an injunction in favour of the petitioners restraining the respondent no.3 from obstructing the possession of the petitioners over the way. The Mamlatdar had further directed the respondent no.3 to remove the obstruction from the said way. While passing the order dated 29.12.2007, the Mamlatdar considered the Talathi’s report as well as the Spot Inspection Note. The Mamlatdar had also considered the panchnama and the other documents and statements of the parties before deciding the matter by the order dated 29.12.2007. The order passed by the Mamlatdar on 29.12.2007 was challenged by respondent no.3 in an appeal before the S.D.O. The S.D.O., by impugned order dated 3.11.2008 had allowed the revision application by setting aside the order of Mamlatdar, dated 29.12.2007. 3. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned order dated 3.11.2008, it appears that the S.D.O. has not considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties as also the various reports filed on record before setting aside the order passed by the Mamlatdar on 29.12.2007. The only reason stated by the S.D.O. for reversing the order of the Mamlatdar dated 29.12.2007, is that there were no markings in the report of the Talathi dated 9.2.2007 about the right of way. It appears from a reading of the impugned order dated 3.11.2008 that the S.D.O. has not considered the relevant evidence as also the submissions made on behalf of the parties before reversing the order passed by the Mamlatdar on 29.12.2007. The revision has not been decided by the S.D.O. in accordance with law. 4. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order passed by the S.D.O. dated 3.11.2008 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the S.D.O. for deciding the revision, afresh on merits. The revision should be decided by the S.D.O. as early as possible and within a period of four months from the date of this order. 5. The impugned order passed by the S.D.O. dated 3.11.2008 is hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded to the S.D.O. for deciding the revision, afresh on merits. The revision should be decided by the S.D.O. as early as possible and within a period of four months from the date of this order. 5. Parties undertake to appear before the S.D.O. on 30.11.2009, so that the issuance of individual notices to the parties could be dispensed with. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.