(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 6983 OF 2010 1. Mastan Shah s/o. Akbar Shah, Age : 70 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 2. Shaikh Hussain s/o. Shaikh Yasin, Age : 50 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 3. Rahim s/o. Sadruddin Shaikh, Age : 70 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 4. Wazir Baig s/o. Shabbir Baig, Age : 32 years, Occupation : Business. 5. Shaikh Sahfiq s/o. Shaikh Ibrahim, Age : 40 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 6. Shaikh Khwaja s/o. Shaikh Basheer, Age : 42 years, Occupation : Agriculture. 7. Shabbir Baig s/o. Chhotu Baig, Age : 30 years, Occupation : Business. All are the members of Muslim Committee, Pandharpur, Taluka and Dist. : Aurangabad. All R/o. Pandharpur, Taluka and Dist. : Aurangabad. .. Petitioners. (2) versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad. 2. The District Collector, Aurangabad. 3. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Sub-Division, Aurangabad, District : Aurangabad. 4. The Tahsildar, Aurangabad, District : Aurangabad. 5. The Taluka Inspector of Land Records, Aurangabad, at Aurangabad. 6. The Grampanchayat, Pandharpur, Taluka & Dist. : Aurangabad, Through its Gramsevak. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. A.R. Rathod, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mr. S.K. Tambe, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 5. Mr. D.A. Karnik, Advocate, for respondent no.6. ........................ (3) CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 19TH NOVEMBER 2010 COURT'S ORDER (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. The petition has been filed by the present petitioners, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents / authorities to allot 2 Acres of land for Muslim Kabrastan and Idgah from Gut No. 175 situated at village Waladgaon, adjacent to village Pandharpur (Taluka & District : Aurangabad). 2. In an affidavit filed on behalf of respondent nos. 3 and 4, it is stated that a proposal has been prepared by the Sub- Divisional Officer and the same has been forwarded to the Collector. It has been categorically stated that the proposal is under process and the same would be decided in accordance with the provisions contained in the Government Resolution dated 8th February 1983. 3. In that view of the matter, we find that the petition is premature in nature and, as such, it is disposed of. ( K.K. TATED ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp6983