1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA WRIT PETITION NOS. 608 AND 609 OF 2009 Smt. Natalia Gama and others. ... Petitioners versus Shri Vasudev R. Naik and another. ... Respondents Shri G. Shirodkar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri Sudin Usgaonkar, Advocate for Respondent No.1. CORAM : N. A. BRITTO, J. DATE : 8TH JULY, 2010. P.C.:- Learned Counsel on behalf of the parties are present. The Petitioners herein claim to be the tenants of the Respondents. They filed three sets of applications before the Mamlatdar, namely under Section 4 r/w Sections 7, 8-A(2) and 8-A(3) of the Agricultural Tenancy Act, 1964. The main inquiry into the applications under Section 4 r/w Section 7 and Section 8-A(2) is yet to be held. Application under Section 8-A(3) was partly granted by the Mamlatdar by Order dated 15-3-2000 against which both the parties filed appeals to the Deputy Collector. In the case of the Petitioners/tenants, the Deputy Collector directed an inquiry to be held and the 2 case of the Respondents/landlords, it was dismissed. Against the said Orders of the Deputy Collector, the Respondents/landlords filed Tenancy Revision Applications before the Tribunal and the same were allowed, and the Order of the Deputy Collector dated 28-2-2002 as well as of the Mamlatdar were set aside and the case was remanded to the Mamlatdar. What now remains to be decided by the Mamlatdar are the applications filed by the Petitioners claiming to be the tenants under Section 4 r/w Section 7 and Section 8-A(2) of the said Act. The only grievance of the Petitioners is that both the said applications are required to be decided by one inquiry. The Mamlatdar therefore is hereby directed to conduct one inquiry into the said two applications as expeditiously as possible and in accordance with law. With the above observations, both the Writ Petitions are hereby disposed off. N. A. BRITTO, J. RD