IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE CIVIL JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 63 OF 2009 Sandesh Bhimrao Kakde ..Petitioner versus State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. J. Reddy Aradwad for Petitioner. Mr. A.H. Palekar, A Panel Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr.Nitin Jamdar for Respondent No.3 Mr. V.B. Naik and Mr. M.S. Karnik for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & A. A. SAYED , JJ. DATED : 31ST MARCH, 2010. P.C. The petitioner apparently appears to have been put up to file the present petition. From the reply it is on record that the construction has come up prior to 1988. Respondent No. 4 purchased shares in the Company on 20-12-1989 and respondent No.5 on 13-9--1996 2 In the reply filed by Shri Sudhir Gangadhar Sopal, respondent No.5 in this petition, it would be clear that like the construction on which respondent No.4 has a factory in the said industrial area all constructions had come up in 1960. The petitioner chose not to seek any reliefs against other constructions in the said industrial area. 3 This Court can only entertain a petition at the instance of a person who espouses a public cause. In the instant case a private cause is sought to be espoused by the petitioner in the guise of PIL petition by singling out only the present private respondent and that too after over 25 years. We are therefore, not inclined to interfere in the exercise of our extra ordinary jurisdiction. Petition is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.5000/- to be paid in favour of respondent No.4 and 5. Sd/- (F.I. REBELLO J.) Sd/- ( A. A. SAYED, J.)