{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7329 OF 2009 Vinayak s/o Dhondopant Deo (Bhatlawande) since deceased, through L.Rs. & others Petitioners Versus Balaji s/o Ramrao Bhosale and others Respondents Mr.C.R.Deshpande, advocate for petitioners Mr.A.N.Irpatgire, advocate for respondents no.1 to 3. Mr.N.N.Jadhav, A.G.P. For Respondent No.5. CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 7 th September, 2010 PER COURT: 1 Petitioners herein are raising challenge to the order passed by Deputy Collector (Atiyat), Udgir on 19.09.2009, whereby it was ordered that the disputed land be taken in possession by the Tahsildar on behalf of State Government. It is stated by the Counsel appearing for petitioners that the order passed by Deputy Collector (Atiyat) has been challenged in an appeal presented to the Collector (Atiyat) and the appeal is pending. The inaction on the part of the Collector to pass any orders in the matter has compelled the petitioners to approach this Court by way of this writ petition. {2} 2 It is contended that after issuance of the order by the Deputy Collector, there were attempts to take over possession of the property and the Collector, in spite of making specific requests, did not pass any interim orders. 3 This Court, at the time of issuance of notices, has protected interest of the petitioners by directing the parties to maintain status quo on 11.11.2009. The interim order of status quo granted by this Court is still operating. It cannot be disputed that the question involved in the matter is required to be dealt with by the appellate authority provided under the statute i.e. Collector (Atiyat). In the facts and circumstances of this case, ends of justice would be met if the Collector (Atiyat) is directed to decide the pending appeal expeditiously. At the same time, interim protection granted by this Court on 11.11.2009 shall remain operative till decision of the Collector. 4 The petitioners apprehend that if decision of the Collector goes against them, immediate action would be taken and as a result of which, they would loose possession of the property. Petitioners contend that they are in possession of the disputed property since many years and at any rate, not less than fifty years. The apprehension expressed by the petitioners cannot be said to be unreasonable. {3} 5 In these circumstances, therefore, Collector (Atiyat) is directed to decide the appeal as expeditiously as possible, preferably within six months from today. The interim protection granted by this Court on 11.11.2009 is directed to remain in operation during pendency of appeal and further for a period of four weeks after decision of the Collector (Atiyat), if said decision goes against interest of the petitioners. 6 With these directions, petition stands disposed of. R.M.BORDE JUDGE adb/wp732909