1 wp5092-10.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5092/2010 Pepsico India Holding Pvt. Ltd. Through its Authorised Representative & Signatory Nilesh Choudhary, Plant Accountant ....Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ....Respondents. ... Shri S.G.Chapalgaonkar,Adv.for petitioner. Shri S.A.Gaikwad h/f Shri A.B.Gaikwad,Adv.for R.4. ... CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL AND T.V.NALAWADE, JJ. DATE : 13th DECEMBER ,2011 ORAL ORDER : 1] Heard. The petitioner was issued a notice dated 5/6/2010 by Gram Panchayat, Wahegaon in respect of assessment of property tax. The petitioner moved the State Government on 6/11/2008 by filing application U/s 124(6) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 2 wp5092-10.odt 1958. The petitioner submits that the State Government directed the Chief Officer, Zilla Parishad for submitting report. Consequent thereto, the Deputy Chief Executive Officer communicated to the Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Paithan vide letter dated 29/31-5-2010 for submitting report within three days. It is the case of the petitioner that inspite of this communication, no reply has been forwarded by the authorities to the State Government, neither the State Government passed any order. Consequent to the notice issued, the respondents Zilla Parishad and the Gram Panchayat filed affidavit in reply. 2] The learned counsel for the Gram Panchayat submits that the petitioner has already resorted to statutory remedies in preferring Application under Section 124(6) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, therefore, Petition is not maintainable at this stage. 3] We have considered the documents placed on record, replies filed. The State Government shall enquire into from the 3 wp5092-10.odt Zilla Parishad authorities and the B.D.O. Panchayat Samiti in respect of non compliance of the communication made, in case State has not been forwarded to any information as desired by it. 4] In respect of the relief claimed by the petitioner, we are of the view that as petitioner has already resorted to proceedings u/s 124(6) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958, no interference is warranted at this stage by this Court in its extra ordinary writ jurisdiction. 5] In case application filed by the petitioner u/s 124(6) of the Bombay Village Panchayats Act, 1958 is still pending with the State, we direct the State/its authorities to dispose of the same on its own merits within six months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The petitioner is entitled to file an application for seeking interim relief in the meanwhile before the State Government. We have not expressed any opinion on merits of the 4 wp5092-10.odt matter. We do not find any reason to continue the interim relief granted earlier. Interim relief is vacated. Petition is dismissed. (T.V.NALAWADE, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL,J.) umg/wp5092-10