1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.3048 OF 2010. 1. Chaudhari Noorduddin Mohd. Younus S/o Mohd. Idris and others ... Petitioners. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents. ... Mr.S.S.Kazi, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.S.K.Kadam, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for the State. ... CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND : S.V.GANGAPURWALA,JJ. Date : 08.04.2010. PER COURT 1. This is is a petition obviously filed as a Public Interest Litigation seeking to challenge the administrative approval given by 2 the Government for shifting of the Tahsil office of village Paranda, which is presently located at a site in Ward No.14 to site at the outskirts of village Paranda. 2. Mr.Kazi, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged before us that in the event such a shifting is permitted the residents of Paranda would be put to lot of inconvenience on account of travel to the Tahsil Office which would be located at the outskirts of the village; (2) The District Supply Officer in his communication has also opined that the demolition of the foodgrains godowns and construction thereon of the Tahsil office would not be appropriate; (3) The Government had initially approved the construction of Tahsil Office at the site at which presently it is being occupied. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the Government would be put to unnecessary expenses as Tahsildar has been conferred with the honour of leading the procession from the Tahsil Office to the Dargah which is situated in the heart of village. The 3 Learned Govt. Pleader has urged before us that this is purely an administrative decision and no judicial review of the same is available much less by way of a Public Interest Litigation. 3. Assuming that what has been urged before us by the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct, the decision to shift the Tahsil Office at the place different than which is desired by the petitioners can not be matter of judicial review, much less by way of a Public Interest Litigation. The decision involved is purely administrative and though the learned counsel for the petitioner has urged before us that the opinion of the residents was not invited, there is no requirement of the statute inviting the opinion or the objections before shifting of a Government Office. The administrative sanction indicates the purpose for which the shifting is to be effected and the use to which the old building of the Tahsil Office would be put to. 4. We see no merit in the present petition 4 and the petition is, therefore, summarily dismissed with no order as to costs. (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) (P.V.HARDAS,J.) asp/office/wpwp3103.10