1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR W.P. NO. 1418/1986 (Sshrimant Raje Laxmansinghrao Fattesinghrao Bhonsale and 3 others vs. State of Maharashtra and others ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's orders. Mr.Uday Dastane, Adv. for petitioners Mrs.K.H.Joshi, AGP for R-1 State Mr.S.K.Mishra, Adv. for R-2 & 3 CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR AND S.R.DONGAONKAR, JJ DATED : 26 th JUNE, 2008. Counsel for the petitioners states that no instructions are forthcoming from the petitioners. 2. In the companion matters, we have observed that wherever representations were made, the authorities have considered those representations and most of the cases have been regularized being found in conformity with the G.R. The question whether the petitioner is covered by the said scheme will have to be considered by the authority in the first place. That is possible only if the petitioners were to make representation to the appropriate authority in that behalf. 3. The appropriate course, therefore, in our opinion, is to dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioners to make 2 representation to the appropriate authority within three months from today, failing which the authority would be free to proceed against the land in question in accordance with law. However, if such representation is made within the specified time, the authority shall decide the same expeditiously and not later than three months from the date of its receipt. 4. Till the said representation is decided, the authority shall not take any precipitative action in respect of the suit land of such applicants. 5. Needless to observe that the representation will have to be considered on its own merits in accordance with law. All questions are kept open. Petition disposed of. JUDGE JUDGE Rvjalit