1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 2524 OF 2010 (Shri Zanaklal Surajlal Lilhale vs. Gram Panchayat, Ratnara & Ors.) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. JULY 20, 2010. Heard Shri Waghmare, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Vastani, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and Shri Jaiswal, learned AGP for respondents No. 2 & 3. The learned AGP is seeking time to obtain more instructions in the matter, however, his request is rejected. Shri Waghmare, learned counsel contends that the petitioner is in possession since 1993 and, therefore, Gram Panchayat had lost right to take action for removal of alleged encroachment. Shri Vastani, learned counsel states that both the Courts have concurrently found that the petitioner is not in possession and have also found that the encroachment removed was recent one. He invites attention to Resolution dated 25.06.1993 passed by Gram Panchayat, Gondia, to show that the petitioner claims allotment of land on the basis of that resolution and at that time, the petitioner himself was Up- 2 Sarpanch. It is apparent that the land could not have been allotted to anybody by passing such resolution. However, considering the concurrent findings, I am not inclined to interfere in writ jurisdiction in present matter. The proceedings in Regular Civil Suit No. 138 of 2008 filed by the petitioner are expedited and the trial Court is directed to decide that suit finally by 31st December 2010. The petitioner or respondent No.1 shall not seek any adjournment in the matter. During the pendency of the suit, Respondent No. 1 shall preserve the property as it is. With these observations and directions, writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. JUDGE *GS.