1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.2094 OF 2010 Santosh s/o Asaram Aswar, Age 33 years, Occu.Agril., R/o Maliwada, Taluka and Dist.Aurangabad .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through Forest and Revenue Department 2. The Collector, Aurangabad District Aurangabad 3. The Tahsildar, Aurangabad District Aurangabad .. RESPONDENTS Shri Vikas Pawar, Advocate holding for Shri R.C.Kulkarni, Advocate for petitioner Shri K.G.Patil, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondents CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ DATE : 15th March 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ for directing the respondents to release the encroachment of the petitioner on the “Gairan” land of Gut No.9 of village Maliwada, Taluka and District Aurangabad to the extent of 2 hectares, in accordance with law. Alternatively, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 2 and 3 to decide the representation submitted by the petitioner dated 20.1.2010 as expeditiously as possible. 3. The petitioner undisputedly has encroached upon the government land and pursuant to the policy of the State Government has submitted a representation/application dated 20.1.2010 for regularisation of the encroachment of the petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that the said representation/application is pending consideration with the respondents. 4. In the light of the fact that the said application/representation seeking regularisation of the encroachment of the petitioner is pending consideration with the respondents, we direct the respondents to decide the said application, in accordance with law. The learned Assistant Govt.Pleader states that the respondents would decide the said 3 application, if pending, in accordance with law, within six months from today. We accordingly accept the said statement as an undertaking to the Court. 5. We accordingly allow this petition and direct the respondents to decide the application/representation of the petitioner, within six months from today, in accordance with law and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 6. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/2094.10wp)