1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.4662 OF 2010 1. Chandrabhan s/o Trimbak Aware, Age 57 years, Occ. Agri., R/o Dhodalgaon, Tq. Vaijapur, District Aurangabad. 2. Kailas s/o Chandrabhan Aware, Age 36 years, Occ. Agri., R/o Dhodalgaon, Tq. Vaijapur, District Aurangabad. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Irrigation Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2. The Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department Division No.1, Aurangabad. 3. The Deputy Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department, Division No.1, Aurangabad. 4. The Sub-Divisional Officer, Shivna Takli Canal, Takli, (Vasahat Takli), Tq. Kannad, Through the Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Department, Division No.1, Aurangabad. ... RESPONDENTS ..... Shri J.M. Murkute, Advocate for petitioners 2 Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for respondents ..... CORAM: P.V. HARDAS & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED: 15th June, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER 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. We have heard Mr. J.M. Murkute, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, learned A.G.P. for respondents, who accepts notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 4. 3. The only relief which the petitioner has prayed for is for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to decide the application submitted by the petitioners for altering the directions and course of the canal which is proposed to be construed by the respondents. 3 4. In the light of the fact that the same application/ representation is pending, we direct the respondents to decide the said application/ representation, in accordance with law, within a period of six weeks from today and communicate the decision thereon to the petitioners. 5. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. (N.D. DESHPANDE, J.) (P.V. HARDAS, J.)