1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5280 OF 2010 Dnyaneshwar S/o Raosaheb Patil, Age : Major Years, Occu. : Agril., R/o Mangalwar Peth, Paranda, Tq. Paranda, District Osmanabad. .. .. Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through it's Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue & Forest, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Collector, Osmanabad, District Osmanabad. 3. The Tahsildar Paranda, Tq. Paranda, Dist. Osmanabad. .. .. Respondents Shri A. S. More, Advocate for the Petitioner. Shri K. J. Ghute Patil, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. CORAM : P. V. HARDAS AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 29TH JULY, 2010. 2 ORAL JUDGMENT [Per P. V. HARDAS, J. ] : . Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With consent of learned counsel for the parties this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner very fairly states that the petitioner does not press with the relief at prayer clause "B" to the petition and only prays for prayer clause "C" of issuing a writ directing the respondent No. 1 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 18.01.2010 forwarded by the respondent No. 2/Collector to the respondent No. 1. In the light of limited relief which the petitioner has prayed for in this petition, we deem it appropriate to decide this petition finally at this stage. 3. We therefore, allow this petition and direct the respondent No. 1 to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 18.01.2010 forwarded by the respondent No. 2/Collector, if pending, in accordance with law, within a period of two months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 3 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above said terms with no order as to costs. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ P. V. HARDAS, J.] bsb/July 10