1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.5090 OF 2009 M/s. Moti Ratan Estate, Through Partner Mr. Vijay Nemichand Kasliwal, having its office at Kasliwal Nivas, near old Bridge, Old Mondha, Nanded, Dist-Nanded. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) State of Maharashtra, Through its Revenue & Forest Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, 2) The Collector of Nanded and Revenue head of Nanded Distrist, 3) The Taluka Inspector of Land Records, Collector Office Compound, Nanded. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Mr. Pritesh K. Patni Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Nandkumar B. Khandare, Government Pleader for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. ... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL & K.U. CHANDWAL, JJ. DATE : 3RD NOVEMBER, 2009. 2 PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The Petitioner challenges the notice issued by the Taluka Inspector of Land Records indicating that the Petitioner's land would be acquired for establishing Divisional Commissionerate at Nanded. Learned counsel Mr. Pritesh Patni for the Petitioner submits that issue of establishment of Divisional Commissionerate itself is subjudice before this Court in Writ Petition No.155 of 2009 and other connected Petitions. Learned counsel submits that issue as to whether the Divisional Commissionerate shall be established at Latur or Nanded being subjudice, the State authorities do not have any power under law to issue notice for acquisition of land for that purpose. 2. Mr. Khandare, learned Government Pleader submits that the Petition itself is premature. He further submitted that even though the notice dated 3rd July 2009 issued to the Petitioner, Section 4 notice is yet to be issued. The Petitioner has alternate efficacious 3 remedies available in case the Petitioner wants to raise the issue regarding acquisition of land, establishment of Divisional Commissionerate at Latur or Nanded, or any other ground available to the Petitioner. 3. We find substance in the submissions advanced by learned Government Pleader Mr. Khandare. We find that the Petitioner has efficacious remedies which could be utilized at the appropriate stage. The issue regarding establishment of Divisional Commissionerate at Latur or Nanded is entirely different issue, which at present is not germane for this Court to consider in the proceedings of this Petition. All issues available to the Petitioner in the eye of law are kept open. We therefore dispose of the Petition being premature and not maintainable at this stage. [K.U. CHANDIWAL, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] asb/NOV09/wp5090.09