1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.3932 of 1994 1] Uttam Dada Sanap Age 65 years, Occ. Agriculture r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. 2] Narayan Appa Vanwe, Age 70 years, Occ. Agri.. r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. 3] Ashruba Bapu Khatal Age 70 years, Occ. Agri. r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. 4] Dhanaji Ranu Mane, Age 68 years, Occ. Agri. r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. 5] Anna Paraji Khatal Age 65 years, Occ. Agri. r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. 6] Vithal Madhavrao Nagargoje Age 61 years, Occ. Agri. R/o. Sonesawargaon, Tq. Patoda Dist. Beed. Petitioners Versus 2 1] The State of Maharashtra 2] The Secretary, General Administration Department, Freedom Fighters' Pension Division, Mantralaya, Bombay -32. 3] The Collector, Beed. Respondents with WRIT PETITION NO. 4077 OF 1994 1] Sunder Nivrutti Sanap Age 60 years, Occ. Agri. r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. 2] Trimbak Dagadu Sanap Age 70 years, Occ. Agri. r/o. Wadzari, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. Petitioners. Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra 2] The Secretary, General Administration Department, Freedom Fighters' Pension Division, Mantralaya, Bombay -32. 3] The Collector, Beed. Respondents with WRIT PETITION NO. 4078 OF 1994 Manohar Genaji Bangar Age 65 years, Occ. Agri. R/o. Bhayala, Tq. Patoda, District Beed. . Petitioners 3 Versus 1] The State of Maharashtra 2] The Secretary, General Administration Department, Freedom Fighters' Pension Division, Mantralaya, Bombay -32. 3] The Collector, Beed. Respondents Mr. A.B. Kale, Advocate for the petitioner Mrs. R.K. Ladda, AGP for the respondent No.1 and 3 Mr. Bhushan Kulkarni Advocate for the respondent No.2 CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA,JJ. DATE : 14TH JUNE, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.] :- 1] The petitioners have filed the petition for grant of Freedom Fighters Pension. The respondent No.3 has filed an affidavit contending that the petitioners have not been found eligible for the freedom fighters pension and the petitioners herein have subsequently filed writ petitions. In view of the fact that subsequent writ petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging the action of the respondents, nothing survives in the present petitions and hence the petitions are dismissed. Rule is discharged. [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.] [B.R. GAVAI,J.] grt/wp.