Sushilabai Kashinath Paithane And ORS v. The State Of Mah And ORS

948wp9936-12.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 948 WRIT PETITION NO.9936 OF 2012 SUSHILABAI KASHINATH PAITHANE AND ORS

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAH AND ORS ...

Advocate for Petitioners : Kulkarni A.M.

AGP for Respondent State: P.N.Kutti Adv.D B Zodge For R/ 6 And 7r/ 9a To 9d Adv Salunke V.D. For R/no.9a To 9e Adv. Kanade Angad L For R/5 ...

CORAM: MANGESH S. PATIL,J.

DATE : 01.09.2021 P.C.:

The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the decision of the competent authority declaring land held by the respondent no.9 to be surplus was subsequently challenged by him in Writ Petition No.2403/1995. It was allowed by judgment and order dated 27/06/2011. The Court had directed restoration of possession in favour of the respondent no.9 landholder. The decision was challenged by the petitioners herein in Letters Patent Appeal which has been subsequently dismissed and the petitioners have now challenged it in the Supreme Court.

2] The learned Advocate Smt.Kulkarni, therefore, submits that the present Writ Petition has now become infructuous

948wp9936-12.odt and may be disposed of. The learned advocates for the other side do not have any objection.

3] The Writ Petition is disposed of.

[MANGESH S. PATIL,J.] umg/