1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SECOND APPEAL NO.433 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.599 OF 2009 Shri Kallappa Basappa Hulle & Ors. )..Appellants Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. )..Respondents ---- Mr. Rahul P. Walvekar i/by Indrajeet Joshi for the appellants. Mrs. V. S. Mhaispurkar AGP for the Respondents. ---- Coram : R.S.MOHITE,J Date : 18th January, 2010 PC 1 There is concurrent findings of fact holding that the appellant is an encroacher on the government land. What is sought to be argued is that the trial Court decreed the appellant/plaintiff’s suit for injunction on the ground that orders have been passed directing him to pay a fine of Rs.500/- for encroaching upon government land and stating that on the payment of fine, the question of regularisation would be taken up. Reliance is placed upon a letter dated 24.12.1993 addressed by the Tahsildar, Karveer in this regard. Since both the Courts have held that the appellant is an encroacher, in my view, there is no substantial question of law involved in the appeal and the Appeal is therefore, dismissed. If however, within two weeks from today the applicant applies for regularisation of his encroachment then the respondents will consider the said application and dispose it of on its own merits. Respondents to maintain status-quo for a period of two weeks and can take further action to remove the encroachment in case no application for regularisation is 2 made. If however, any application for regularisation is made then pending disposal of such application and for a period of 2 weeks, in case there is an adverse decision, the respondents will maintain status-quo. Second Appeal stands disposed off. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.599 OF 2009 1 As the Second Appeal is dismissed, Civil Application does not survive and stands disposed off accordingly. (R.S.MOHITE,J) 3