Kambli 1 WP(l)420.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO.420 OF 2011 ... Mrs.Vidya Nagendra Singh ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.421 OF 2011 ... Mr.Shivhari Prasiddha Tripathi ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.422 OF 2011 Mr.Hridaynarayan Ramajor Tiwari ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.423 OF 2011 ... Mr.Bholanath Tilakdhari Singh ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.424 OF 2011 ... Mrs.Madhuri S. Singh ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.425 OF 2011 ... Kambli 2 WP(l)420.11 Mr.Rambriksh M. Vishwakarma ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.426 OF 2011 ... Mr.Phoolchand Sharma & Anr ...Petitioners v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.427 OF 2011 ... Mr.Sadanand M. Mishra ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.428 OF 2011 ... Dr.Omhari Tripathi ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.429 OF 2011 ... Mr.Devnarayan Subedar Singh ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.430 OF 2011 ... Mr.ramsahai B. Singh ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO.442 OF 2011 ... Kambli 3 WP(l)420.11 Mrs.Vidya Nagendra Singh ...Petitioner v/s. State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents .... Mr.K.R.Tiwari i/b K.R.Tiwari & Co. for the Petitioners. Ms.Uma Palsuledesai, AGP for the State. ... CORAM: D.K.Deshmukh & Anoop V. Mohta, JJ DATED: 9th March, 2011 P.C.: The Petitioners make a grievance against the alleged demolition of structure belonging to their landlord. According to the Petitioners, most of them have filed a civil suit in the City Civil Court, which according to the Petitioners, has been decreed in their favour. If the demolition, according to the Petitioners, is carried out contrary to the decree passed by the City Civil Court, their remedy lies elsewhere and not Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. Petitions are, therefore, disposed of. (D.K.DESHMUKH, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)