1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6197 OF 2009 Shri Gangadhar s/o Radhakisan Khose, Age 52 years, Occu.Agriculture, R/o At Post Sonai, Taluka Nevasa, Dist.Ahmednagar .. PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra (through Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai) 2. The Superintendent of Land Records, Ahmednagar .. RESPONDENTS Shri Sumit S.Agrawal, Advocate holding for Shri B.R.Warma, Advocate for petitioner Shri V.H.Dighe, Assistant Govt.Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND A.V. POTDAR, JJ DATE : 30th September 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER P.V.HARDAS , J ] 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ directing 2 respondent No.2 to decide appeal dated 21.2.2009 filed by the petitioner which is said to be pending. By virtue of prayer clause (B) to the petition, the petitioner prays for staying further proceedings of Civil Suit No.690 of 2008. 3. In the light of the fact that the appeal is said to be pending and the learned Assistant Govt.Pleader on instructions states that the respondent No.2 would decide the appeal within two months, we are inclined to allow this petition in terms of prayer clause (A) to the petition. We, however, are not inclined to grant relief to the petitioner in terms of prayer clause (B) to the petition. We accordingly partly allow this petition and direct the respondent No.2 to decide the appeal filed by the petitioner, within two months from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. The petition stands dismissed to the extent of relief prayed for by the petitioner at prayer clause (B) to the petition. 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no orders as to costs. ( A.V.POTDAR ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE vvr/6197.09wp 3