1 I N THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No. 6111 OF 2010 Milind V. Chimote & ors. v. State of Maharashtra & ors. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's and Registrar's orders orders ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. P.S. Khubalkar Advocate for the Petitioners. Ms. T.Khan AGP for Res. no.1. Mr. C.S. Kaptan Advocate for Respondent no.5. ..... CORAM: V.C. DAGA & A.B.CHAUDHARI, JJ. DATED : 22 nd DECEMBER, _2010. Heard learned counsel for the petition. Perused the petition. 2. This petition is directed against the Resolution dated 23.3.2007 issued by the State Government. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that before issuing of Resolution, opportunity of hearing ought to have been granted to the Corporation. The submission is misplaced. 3. Sofar as the Resolution under challenge is concerned, it reflects the policy of the State Government. No material is placed on record to show the breach of 2 policy of the State. Under these circumstances, no case for interference is made out. Writ petition is dismissed in limine. 4. Needless to mention that in W.P. No. 4604 of 2008 this Court has issued mandamus regarding implementation of Government Resolution impugned in this petition. The Corporation was a party to that petition. The order passed therein has become final and exclusive. The Corporation has acted upon that order. It has accepted 50% grant given by the State Government. All these facts are well within the knowledge of the petitioner who is one of the Councillors of the Corporation. None of these facts are disclosed in the petition by the petitioners. The order passed in the earlier petition referred herein not only binds the Corporation but also its Councillors. In order to circumvent the implementation of the said Government Resolution this petition appears to have been filed. From the pleadings it is clear that this petition is filed and sponsored at the instance of the Corporation. The petition is not a bona fide petition. It is being dismissed with cost quantified in the sum of Rs.15,000/- to be deposited in this Court within fifteen days from today, failing which it shall be recovered as arrears of Land Revenue by the Collector, Amravati. The Municipal Commissioner, Amravati, shall ensure recovery of cost and deposit the same with this Court. In the event of non-payment, the said authority shall intimate non- payment to the Collector with a request to initiate action 3 for recovery. Order accordingly. JUDGE JUDGE /TA/