(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. Letters Patent Appeal No. 34 of 2010 (Against the order dated 15/7/2009 in Writ Petition No. 4514 of 2009) Sk. Shabbir Sk. Ismail, Age : 50 years, Occupation : Agriculture, R/o. Kurhad (Bk.), Taluka : Pachora, District : Jalgaon. .. Appellant. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Jalgaon. 2. Group Grampanchayat, Kurhad (Bk.), Taluka : Pachora, District : Jalgaon. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. A.B. Madke, Advocate, holding for Mr. M.S. Deshmukh, Advocate, for the appellant. Mr. K.B. Chaudhary, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent no.1. Mr. G.V. Wani, Advocate, for respondent no.2. (2) ........................ CORAM : A.P. DESHPANDE & N.D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 16TH FEBRUARY 2010 COURT'S ORDER (Per A.P. Deshpande, J.) : 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal is filed against an order passed by the learned Single Judge of this court, dismissing the Writ Petition, calling in question the legality and validity of an order passed by the District Judge. 2. The appellant filed a suit in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalgaon, being Regular Civil Suit No. 78/2009, contending therein that for the last 80 - 90 years, the members of Muslim community are using the suit land as a burial ground. The Grampanchayat, who was intending to construct an Anganwadi on the suit land, opposed the application claiming temporary injunction, on the ground that the land belongs to Grampanchayat and was not used by the members of Muslim community as a burial ground. The trial court granted temporary injunction. However, the first appellate court reversed the order by holding that the appellant has failed to make out prima facie case for grant of temporary (3) injunction. Aggrieved thereby, the present appellant filed a Writ Petition. However, the Writ Petition came to be dismissed, as the learned Single Judge was of the view that the construction, that was being carried out on the suit land, was for public purpose viz. construction of Anganwadi. 3. Mr. G.V. Wani, learned Counsel appearing for respondent no.2 / Grampanchayat, makes a statement that the construction work, which was in progress, is already completed and hence, the present Letters Patent Appeal is rendered infructuous. 4. In view of the fact that the construction is already over, we decline to entertain the Letters Patent Appeal. 5. Hence, the Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed. ( N.D. DESHPANDE ) ( A.P. DESHPANDE ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/lpa34