1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5791 OF 2008 1. Nagnath Laxman Ghisewad and another .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, and others .. Respondents Shri P. D. Bachate, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri V. H. Dighe, A.G.P. for the Respondents No. 1 to 3. CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 29TH APRIL, 2010. ORAL ORDER [Per NARESH H. PATIL, J. ] : . Heard. 2. The allotment of shops is already been over. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that fact finding report is adverse to the interest of petitioner. Detaile enquiry is 2 conducted, report is submitted along with affidavit in reply. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that in view of disputed questions being involved, in exercise of extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, no interference is called for. The writ petition is dismissed. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL, J.] bsb/April 10