WP No. 11065/10 1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11065 OF 2010 Ramesh s/o. Bodhraj Nagpal, R/o. Kanchanjunga, R.T.O. Road, Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad. ....Petitioner. Versus The Union of India Through its Secretary, Defence Department & Ors. ....Respondents. Mr. A. S. Bajaj, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. N. S. Choudhari, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 4.. Mr. S.K. Kadam, AGP for respondent Nos. 5 to 7. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & T. V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATED : 5th September, 2011. ORAL ORDER : 1. Heard. 2. The petitioner seeks direction to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to co-operate with the Taluka Inspector of Land RecordS for joint measurement of land survey No. 6/1 and survey No. 124 situated at Jaysingpura, Aurangabad and to fix the boundaries of the said land. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that due to WP No. 11065/10 2 non co-operation of respondent Nos. 1 to 3, the subject land could not be measured. The petitioner states that it is necessary to fix the boundaries and to ascertain whether the subject land is part of survey No. 6/1 or survey No. 124. The counsel further submits that the civil suit filed by the petitioner against the respondents has no relevance to the issue raised in this petition. 4. The respondents have filed affidavit in reply. The learned counsel for the respondent- Union submits that civil suit was filed for injunction by the petitioner which came to be dismissed as not maintainable. In the proceedings of the suit an application came to be filed by the petitioner on 29.10.2009 for following prayer :- "Taluka Inspector of Land Record Aurangabad be appointed as Court Commissioner for measurement of land Sr. no. 6/1, Jaysingpura and for fixing the Eastern boundary of Sr. no. 6/1 which is in between Sr. no. 6/1 of Jaysingpura, Aurangabad and Survey no. 124 in Military area." The counsel submits that in the facts of the case, the petitioner is not entitled for issuance of writ of this Court. 5. We have perused the material placed before us including the order passed by the IVth Jt. Civil Judge, Senior Division, Aurangabad dated 6.3.2010 in Regular Civil Suit No. 636/09. In the facts of the case, WP No. 11065/10 3 we find that the petitioner is not entitled for issuance of writ against the respondents. The petitioner is raising issue in respect of a civil dispute. No interference is called for in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Petition is dismissed. 6. Leave to correct nomenclature of respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Correction be carried out today. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] [ NARESH H. PATIL, J.] ssc/wp11065.10