(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 65 OF 2009 1. Jan Mohammed Babulal Pathan, Age : 57 years, Occupation : Agriculture and Service. 2. Jalal Jan Mohammed Pathan, Age : 32 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 3. Azij Jan Mohammed Pathan, Age : 27 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 4. Ashabi @ Madina Jan Mohammed Pathan, Age : 28 years, Occupation : Agriculture. All R/o. Ganesh Nagar, Survey No. 42/1, Vadgaonsheri, Pune - 14. .. Petitioners. versus 1. Chhagan Gulab Shaikh, Age : 58 years, Occupation : Agriculture & Priest. 2. Bibi w/o. Chhagan Shaikh, Age : 52 years, Occupation : Household. 3. Dada Chhagan Shaikh, Age : 32 years, Occupation : Agriculture. (2) 4. Ashabi Chhagan Shaikh, Age : 27 years, Occupation : Household. All R/o. Miri, Taluka : Pathardi, District : Ahmednagar. .. Respondents. .......................... Mr. A.S. Bajaj, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. N.V. Gaware, Advocate, for respondent nos.1 to 4. .......................... CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 5TH AUGUST 2009. COURT'S ORDER : 1. The petition taken up for hearing by consent of parties. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioners have challenged the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Commissioner, Nasik, in RTS/Revision No. 87/2008, dated 8th September 2008, and the judgment and order passed by the learned Additional Collector, Ahmednagar, in Second RTS/APPEAL/32/2007, dated 28th March 2008. 3. This court, vide order dated 25th June 2009, has issued rule and granted interim relief in terms of prayer clause "D" with observation, (3) that the entries existing before opening of revenue litigation to remain as it is. 4. Against the said order, the respondents have filed Letters Patent Appeal No. 134/2009. The said appeal is disposed of by directing the learned trial Judge to expedite hearing of the suit and decide the same on its own merits within a period of six months from today. Till the disposal of the suit, the parties are directed to maintain status quo of possession as was existing on the date of the order passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Officer i.e. 22nd November 2003. 5. In that view of the matter, no further orders are necessary in the petition. The petition is, therefore, disposed of. Rule is discharged. Interim relief stands vacated. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp65