1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1917 OF 2010 1. Tukaram Pura Pawar, Age 55 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 2. Gulsing Pura Pawar, Age 80 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 3. Rupa Pura, Age 65 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 4. Lochiram Jagu Pawar, Age 55 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 5. Potiram Mohan Pawar, Age 75 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 6. Merchand Bandu Rathod, Age 75 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 7. Gulchand Lakha, Age 60 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 8. Gulsing Bhavada Pawar, Age 70 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 2 9. Lochiram Mohan Pawar, Age 70 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad 10. Dongru Ramchandra Rathod, Age 55 years, Occu.Agri., R/o Wadner, Taluka Kannad, District Aurangabad .. PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra through its District Collector, Aurangabad, Taluka and District Aurangabad 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, J.P.No.1, Aurangabad, District Aurangabad .. RESPONDENTS Shri A.V.Patil, Advocate holding for Shri V.D.Gunale, Advocate for petitioners Shri K.G.Patil, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents CORAM : P.V. HARDAS AND S.V.GANGAPURWALA, JJ DATE : 15th March 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER P.V.HARDAS, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioners pray for issuance of a writ to the respondents to decide the application of the petitioners filed by the petitioners 3 under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 20.7.1999 which are said to be pending. Shri Patil, learned Assistant Government Pleader, who accepts notice on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 states that if the said applications are pending the respondents would decide it in accordance with law. 3. Since the petitioners claim that the applications have been submitted by them, in accordance with law and the same are pending, we allow this writ petition and direct the respondents to decide the applications filed by the petitioners under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, dated 20.7.1999, if pending, in accordance within law, within six months from today, uninfluenced by the fact that we have allowed the petition and directed the respondents to decide the same. 4. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. 5. Copy duly authenticated by the Court Sheristedar be provided to the learned Counsel for the parties to act upon. ( S.V.GANGAPURWALA ) ( P.V.HARDAS ) JUDGE JUDGE (vvr/1917.10wp)