1 rpa IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 825 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 825 OF 2008 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 825 OF 2008 IN IN IN WRIT PETITION NO.9319 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.9319 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.9319 OF 2007 ....................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda . of Coram, appearances, Court’s . Orders or directions and . Registrar’s Order Court’s or Judge’s Order ....................................................... Mr.P.D.Dalvi for the Respondent. Mr.V.P.Malvankar A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Mr.Amit Sale for Respondent No.5. CORAM : J.N.PATEL AND CORAM : J.N.PATEL AND CORAM : J.N.PATEL AND S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. S.S.SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 24TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 24TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 24TH MARCH, 2008. P.C.:- P.C.:- P.C.:- . Heard. 2. The Applicant is the Original Respondent No.5 having lost his case challenging the Acquisition of land right up till the Supreme Court which according to the Applicant had remanded the matter for examining the case of the Applicant in the light of various G.R’s and Circulars. Particularly circular dated 26th June, 1988 to the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, and the Divisional Commissioner having rejected the 2 application after examining the issue by his order dated 13th June, 2003. We find no merits in the application filed by the Petitioner seeking an order from this Court directing the Respondent Nos. 1,2 and 4 not to take possession of the land bearing Gat No.160 adm.1 Hec.62 Are situated in Village Shirati, Taluka Shirol, District Kolhapur on the basis of the statement dated 12th March, 2008 made by the Collector, Kolhapur. Needless to say that the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Pune Division, was in exercise of the powers delegated to him by the Government of Maharashtra in the matter. Therefore, the contention of the Applicant i.e. application under section 48 is pending under the Hon’ble Minister who has granted status-quo cannot come to his rescue for the reason that the State Government having once rejected the claim of the Petitioner cannot again 3 reconsider it under section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and pendency of the second application with the State Government and the ad-interim order passed by the Hon’ble Minister ordering status-quo being without jurisduiction is non est. It is evident from the orders that are admittedly on record, that the Applicant is not in possession after the award came to be passed. Therefore, we do not find any merits in the Application. The same is rejected. (J.N.PATEL,J.) (J.N.PATEL,J.) (J.N.PATEL,J.) (S.S.SHINDE,J.) (S.S.SHINDE,J.) (S.S.SHINDE,J.)