The Bombay High Court today refused to entertain a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking relocation of the air force wing located within the Pune airport premises for expansion of the airport. [Aniruddha Deshpande v. Union of India & Ors.]. .A division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Arif Doctor observed that the location of the airport and the Indian Air Force station was the prerogative of the government and it would not be proper for courts to interfere with the same."Where to have an airport, where not to have an airport, that is something that the executive will consider. The entire subject lies in the realm of the executive. If they (executive) interfere in private laws or fundamental rights of individuals, then we can interfere. You have other forums, go and use them," the Court said. .Advocate Dormaan Dalal appearing for the petitioner Aniruddha Deshpande said that the airport was a 'civil enclave' operating from within the premises of the Indian Air Force station located at Lohegaon, Pune. Deshpande had received information that authorities had acquired land for constructing the new international airport at another location in Pune, however, nothing happened after that.He had made representations to the authorities asking them to expedite the process and to request them to consider relocating the air force station. However, since he had not received any responses, he approached the High Court seeking a writ of mandamus to the Ministry of Civil Aviation and to form an expert committee to consider the feasibility of relocating the air force station..The Court, however, declined stating that the petitioner could pursue administrative remedies. "We are not disputing the cause you are espousing. You may have a good cause, that Pune needs a bigger airport, we get that. We are only saying use the proper forum. The question foremost is whether this should lie before the court, we grant you liberty to pursue your remedy on the administrative side," the bench concluded. The petitioner then withdrew his PIL with the Court granting him liberty to pursue the cause before other forums.