1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Public Interest Litigation No. 29 of 2011 Anna Hazare and others VERSUS Municipal Council, Kamptee and another - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr. A. C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. N. W. Sambre, Government Pleader for the respondent no.1 Mr. K. N. Shukul, Advocate for the respondent no.7 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ. DATE : 5th August, 2011. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The present petition is directed against the Government Resolution dated 08.06.2007, by which the State Government has permitted and subsidised the manufacturing and selling of liquor made from food grains. Though, the said policy/decision dated 08.06.2007 was subsequently withdrawn by the Government Resolution dated 31.08.2009, since the grants made to the licensees in terms of the Government Resolution dated 08.06.2007 were not withdrawn, the petitioners have also challenged the Government Resolution dated 31.08.2009 to that extent. On hearing Mr. A. C. Dharmadhikari, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Sambre, the learned Government Pleader for the State and Mr. Shukul, the learned counsel for the respondent no.7, 2 it appears that an identical challenge was made by the petitioners in Public Interest Litigation No. 259 of 2009 filed at the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court and the High Court was pleased, by the judgment dated 10.03.2010, to dismiss the Public Interest Litigation. Since, the challenges made in this Public Interest Litigation are almost identical to the challenges made by the petitioners in P.I.L. No. 259 of 2009, we dismiss this Public Interest Litigation, for the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 10.03.2010. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE JUDGE Diwale