1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Dist.: PUNE WRIT PETITION NO. 48 OF 2008 Dilip Babanrao Murkute ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 50 OF 2008 Devendrasing Ramkisansing Gil ... Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents IN BOTH MATTERS: None for the Petitioners Mr. P.M. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader, for the State Mr. R.G. Ketkar for Respondent No. 2. CORAM: B ILAL NAZKI and 2 S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE: JUNE 25, 2008 P. C.:- We have passed a detailed order on 18th June, 2008. 2. The acquisition of the land was challenged mainly on the ground that the Draft Revised Plan had not been approved, but it was pointed out that the Draft Revised Plan had been approved, and, therefore, the petitions had become infructuous. But the learned counsel for the petitioners had sought time to amend the petitions to challenge the approval of the plan. No application for amendment has been made. 3. In the meantime, it is brought to our notice that a Writ Petition raising a similar question, although that was before the approval of the Draft Revised Plan, was dismissed, being Writ Petition No. 3878 of 2007. 4. Since the petitioners had not amended the Writ Petitions, and their counsel are also not present, as also there is no cause of action for the present petitions, as has been held by us on June 18, 2008, these petitions are dismissed. However, if the petitioners are aggrieved of the 3 Draft Revised Plan, they may file fresh petitions. BILAL NAZKI, J. S.S. SHINDE, J.