(1) wp6635-11-group IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6635 OF 2011 Tatyaram Baburao Bhadange PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6670 OF 2011 Mahadu Tulshiram Bhadange PETITIONER VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7754 OF 2011 Bhanudas Madhukar Changale & another PETITIONERS VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & others RESPONDENTS ..... Mr. K.S. Bhore, advocate for the Petitioners in all the three writ petitions. Mr. K.S. Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondent-State in all the three writ petitions. Mr. S.D. Dhongde, advocate for Respondent No. 4. ..... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI AND M.T. JOSHI, JJ. DATED : 4th OCTOBER, 2011 (2) wp6635-11-group ORAL ORDER: 1. Writ Petition No. 7754/2011 was not on today's Board. However, since the identical issue is involved in the said petition, the production is allowed. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by consent. 3. It is the grievance of the petitioners that though an additional land of the petitioners is acquired for the changed alignment of the canal, the same is disputed by the learned counsel for the Respondent No. 4. 4. Both the parties agree that the dispute can be resolved if the petitions are allowed in terms of prayer clause (C). 5. Rule is, therefore, made absolute in terms of prayer clause (C) of the petitions. The joint measurement be done by the T.I.L.R. in presence of the petitioners as well as the representative of respondent No. 4, within six weeks, after giving (3) wp6635-11-group notice to the concerned parties. Needless to state that in the event the report of the T.I.L.R. goes against the petitioners, the petitioners will have a fresh cause of action to approach this Court. [M.T. JOSHI, J.] [B.R. GAVAI, J.] npj/wp6635-11-group