1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.1410 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5577 OF 2008 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Corum: S. B. Deshmukh and Shrihri P. Davare, JJ. Date : 28.10.2010 1. We have heard Shri Amol Shinde, Advocate, holding for Shri P.R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for the applicants, Shri P.G. Deshmukh, Advocate, for Respondent No.1, Shri D.V. Tele, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 2 and 4 and Advocate Shri Anupkumar h/f Advocate Shri R.S.Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.3-Corporation. 2. The applicants, by this civil application, seeks their addition as Respondents in the Writ Petition. 2 3. Indisputably, issue raised in the main writ petition, is regarding demolition of building/structure/ house property, by the Aurangabad Municipal Corporation. Learned counsel for the applicants claims that the applicants were/are tenants in the demolished house property since last 35 years. According to him, the applicants are seeking their addition as respondent so as to get some compensation to they are entitled to. In support of this, he relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India vs. A. Ajit Singh 1997 AIR SC 2669. 4. With the assistance of learned Advocate for the applicant, we have gone through paragraph 9 of the cited case. It was a case of acquisition of agricultural landed property. Provisions of the Tenancy Act, so also of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court. In our view, facts of the reported case are different than those in the case on 3 hand, and the ratio laid down in the cited case is not applicable to the present case. 5. Opposition by Advocate Shri Deshmukh for Respondent No.1-original writ petition, for addition of present applicants as Respondents in the writ petition is justified. 6. In our view, this civil application bears no substance. Civil Application is, accordingly, rejected. We make it clear that if the applicants, if choose to file some other appropriate proceedings, rejection of present civil application will not be an impediment in their way, since we have not entered into merits of the controversy, nor have we recorded our opinion Civil Application stands disposed of. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (S.B.DESHMUKH, J.) 4 pnd/ca1410.10