1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO.99 OF 2003 Gopichand Tukaram Dalvi & Anr. .. Petitioners. V/s. State of Maharashtra & Others .. Respondents. Mr.Alankar Kirpekar i/by Mr.R.V. Govilkar for the petitioners. Mr.P.M. Patil, AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 4. CORAM : R.M. LODHA & NARESH H. PATIL, JJ. DATED : 26TH JULY, 2006. P.C. : We perused the writ petition and the Government Resolution dated March 4, 1989, marked ‘X’ for identification purposes handed in by the AGP. 2. The petitioners have prayed that direction be issued to the respondents to reassess, reexamine, revaluate the circumstances and declare correct production figures, estimates and extend all benefits, facilities and the schemes to the villagers of Arvi who are suffering either draught or semi draught conditions. It is alleged that the respondents have submitted false reports and declined to declare village Arvi as draught prone area. 3. Mr.P.M. Patil, AGP submits that the procedure of Annual Valuation of Crops (paisewari) is strictly 2 followed as per the Government Resolution dated March 4, 1989. The Village Valuation of Crops Committee comprising of Revenue Inspector or any officer of same rank is the President of the said Committee and six other members are Gramsevak, Sarpanch, Progressive Farmer, President of Credit Co-operative Society, Small land holder and Talathi. The standard yield is computed as per the parameters prescribed therein. The said Government Resolution also provides for valuations eligible for concession. Save and except the bare statement that the respondents have submitted false report, nothing specific has been shown by the petitioners that may lead us to infer that the Government Resolution dated March 4, 1989 providing procedure of Annual Valuation of Crops has not been followed by the respondents. 4. We are, therefore, satisfied that no order can be passed in the writ petition except direction to the State Government to comply with the Government Resolution dated March 4, 1989 in its entirety and we order accordingly. 5. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. (R.M. LODHA, J.) 3 (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)