1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.230 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3816 OF 1997(D) (Baburao s/o Annaji Sable and another ..vs.. Pramilabai w/o Bhanudas Lonkar and others) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri P.S. Patil, Advocate for the appellants, Smt. R.D. Raskar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM:- D.B. BHOSALE AND P. B. VARALE, JJ. DATED :- 30 th JULY, 2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This letters patent appeal is directed against the order dated 1-2-2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 3816/97. The order passed by the learned Single Judge reads thus : “ The learned counsel appearing for petitioners states that the only question involved in this petition is whether the petitioners are agriculturists. He points out that by the order dated 13th March, 2002 passed in L.P.A. No. 73 of 2001 (arising out of W.P. No. 1056/1999), this Court has already upheld the findings of the Tahsildar and of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal that the petitioner no.2 is an agriculturist. The petitioner no.1 is wife of petitioner no.2. 2 Since, the status of petitioner no.2 as an agriculturist is already accepted by the authorities and declared by the Court in other proceedings, the present Writ Petition does not survive. The same is disposed of as infructuous. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.” 3. There is no dispute that in the parallel proceedings, which were carried upto this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No.73 of 2001, the respondents were held to be agriculturist and in view thereof, the learned Single Judge has rightly disposed of the writ petition by the order impugned in this letters patent appeal. We do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order in the appeal. Hence, the letters patent appeal is dismissed. JUDGE JUDGE pma