1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5351 OF 2009 Sandesh Bhimrao Kakde ...Petitioner vs 1. State of Maharashtra & 4 ors. ...Respondents Mr. J.G. Reddy for the Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Gokhale, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.1 & 2. Mr. Nitin Jamdar for the Respondent No.3. Mr. Sukand R. Kulkarni for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5. CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATED : 20 TH APRIL, 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Even though the counsel appearing for the Municipal Council has invited our attention to paragraph 1 of the Petition, in our opinion, the question as to whether the specified structures are unauthorized 2 structures or otherwise is a matter to be inquired into by the Council. In one sense, it is the statutory obligation of the Council to examine such issue on its own and, in any case, if it is brought to the notice of the Council, it is too late in the day to contend that the Council would not take any steps because the person who has brought that fact to the notice of the Council has no locus in relation to the concerned structure. Such approach taken by the Council, to say the least, would be pedantic approach and not sub-serve the larger public interest and more so, to discharge its statutory obligation. 3. In the circumstances, we direct the Respondent No.3-Council to forthwith examine the grievance made by the Petitioner contained in the representation dated 17th April, 2009, as also reiterated in the present Petition on its own merit and if the allegations so stated are found to be of some substance, the competent authority will have to take necessary action for demolition of the unauthorized portion of the structure in question, if any, in accordance with law. We make it clear that this order is not an expression of opinion on the issue raised by the Petitioner in the present Petition, one way or the other. All questions raised in this Petition will have to be, in the first place, 3 considered by the competent authority on its own merits, in accordance with law, after giving opportunity to all concerned parties. We hope and trust that the Respondent No.3-Council shall take final decision as expeditiously as possible and, in any case, not later than three months from today. 4. Petition disposed of on the above terms. (R.M. SAVANT, J.) (A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.)