JUDGMENT Rule, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties made returnable forthwith and heard. 2. The order impugned in the above petition is the order, dated 1/3/2011 passed by the District Superintendent of Land Records whereby the Application filed by the petitioner invoking Section 232 of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 for setting aside the order dated 19/7/2010 came to be rejected. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the District Superintendent of Land Records, Nagpur, i.e. respondent no. 1 herein without calling for the service report, proceeded to hear the proceedings filed by the respondent no.3 herein and passed the order dated 19/7/ 2010 directing mutation to be effected in favour of the respondent no.3. It is the case of the petitioner that in the civil proceedings being Regular Civil Suit No. 34/2006 filed by the respondent no.3, the address of the petitioner shown is the correct address i.e. r/o Bela, Tahsil Umred. District Nagpur whereas in the said revenue proceedings, the address of the petitioner given is as r/o Mansar, Taluq Ramtek, District Nagpur. It is the case of the petitioner that he is residing at the address mentioned in the present petition and that the said address in the revenue proceedings has been deliberately given by the respondent no.3 so as to obviate service of notice on him. 4. As indicated above, the petitioner tiled the Application invoking Section 232(3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 for setting aside the said order dated 19/7/2010 on the ground that the said order has been passed without hearing the petitioner and, therefore, has been passed in violation of principles of natural justice. 5. A perusal of the impugned order dated 1/3/2011 discloses that the case of the petitioner as set out in the Application for setting aside the order dated 19/7/2010 has not been considered at all. The respondent no. 1 by merely observing that the petitioner has a remedy of filing an Appeal has disposed of the said Application. The Authority ought to have seen that the petitioner was entitled to file the said Application under Section 232(3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and the Authority was obligated to consider the case of the petitioner and record findings thereon. The Authority ought to have seen that the petitioner was entitled to file the said Application under Section 232(3) of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966 and the Authority was obligated to consider the case of the petitioner and record findings thereon. Having not done so, in my view, the impugned order dated 1/3/2011 cannot be sustained arid is required to be set aside. Hence, the following directions: (i) The impugned order dated 1/3/2011 passed by the District Superintendent of Land Records, Nagpur is quashed and set aside and the matter is relegated back to the District Superintendent of Land Records to re-consider the Application dated 25/10/2010 filed by the petitioner on merits and in accordance with law. (ii) The respondent no. 1 to consider the case of the petitioner and record findings thereon either for acceptance or non-acceptance of the said case. (iii) The parties to appear before the respondent no. 1 on 22/8/2011. The Authority thereafter to decide the said Application within four weeks of the first date of appearance of the parties. 6. Rule is accordingly made absolute in the aforesaid terms with parties to bear their respective costs. Petition allowed.