- 1 - VPH IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.7046 OF 1998 Achyut Janardan Tilak .. Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Harshad Inamdar i/b P. M. Pradhan, for the Petitioner. Mr.S. N., Bhosle, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and 5. Mrs. S. V. Bharucha, for Respondent No.4. CORAM : D. D. SINHA & A. A. SAYED , JJ. DATED : FEBRUARY 16, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The main prayer of the petition reads thus- “B) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus under Article 226 off the Constitution of India or any other appropriate writ and/or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing Respondents to forthwith hand over vacant and peaceful possession of the land admeasuring 73 H and 82 Res situate at village Jirne, Taluka Pen, District Raigad.” - 2 - 2. As per the above referred prayer clause, the petitioner is seeking direction to the respondent to hand over possession of the land admeasuring 73 H, 82 Rs. Situate at village Jirne, Taluka Pen, District Raigad. The counsel for the petitioner states that issue was adjudicated upon by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal and concluded in favour of the petitioner, vide order dated 21st March 1989. The matter was remanded to the Sub-Divisional Officer, who vide order dated 1st February 1991 also decided the issue in favour of the petitioner. However, thereafter the concerned authorities have not taken appropriate steps, pursuant to this order and therefore the petitioner had to approach this Court. 3. The petitioner has not placed the order of Sub-Divisional Officer on record, nor other relevant material in order to substantiate his grievance. In absence thereof it is difficult to appreciate grievance of the petitioner, particularly when according to the learned counsel the authorities below concluded the issue in his favour. It is also brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the land in question originally belonged to a joint family and over a period of time members of the joint family have expired. However, in the absence of specific details in this regard as well as in the absence of - 3 - other material facts it is difficult to appreciate the issue. The petitioner did not argue the matter on any specific ground, as such before us, nor has raised any contention, based on any particular issue and in absence thereof it is difficult for us to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner. 4. For the reasons stated hereinabove, no case is made out for showing our indulgence. Writ Petition is therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. Sd/- [D. D. SINHA, J.] Sd/- [ A. A. SAYED, J.]